Political Fallacies: "I don't understand" isn't an argument

There is a particular kind of weirdness that is common on social media these days.  A post goes something like this:

"I don't understand how anyone can be against this.  If you oppose it, you're a bad person."

The implication is that the writer's opinion is so self-evidently right and obvious that anyone who disagrees must be irrational.  If you're on the side of the writer than it probably has you nodding your head in agreement.  If you're on the other side, you feel disrespected and alienated.  Either way, it has succeeded in one thing - cutting off engagement and discussion that might have actually been beneficial.

This kind of statement is a fallacy known as the Argument from Ignorance.  In such an argument, the speaker states that something is true, simply because they don't know anything that would disprove it.  In the modern day, where the internet makes knowledge available to anyone with a smartphone, PC, or library card, there is really no excuse for descending into this error.  If you "don't know" or "don't understand", I guarantee you there are dozens of people ready, willing, and able to offer you the information or perspective that would dispell your ignorance.

Please note, the problem here isn't taking a position or having an opinion.  Even a strong one.  It is trying to assert that because you don't understand the other side, your side must be right.  It's like a blind man arguing because he can't see it, the traffic light must be green and anyone who asserts otherwise is crazy.

My challenge to you:  STOP USING "I DON'T KNOW" OR I DON'T UNDERSTAND" AS AN ARGUMENT. USE IT AS AN HONEST QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE.  ENGAGE THE OTHER SIDE AND LEARN THEIR ARGUMENTS, IF ONLY SO YOU CAN HONESTLY JUDGE THEM.  The only way to learn is with an open mind.  The only way to stop arguing is to start listening.

The Reality: An Economy Runs on HOPE

While reading a report today on the current economic "meltdown" going on in overseas markets, I came across this paraphrase of George Soros.

Billionaire investor George Soros said he believed the United States was already experiencing the pain of a double dip recession and that Republican opposition to Obama's fiscal stimulus plans was to blame for sluggish growth.

Of course, Mr. Soros's actual words were far more nuanced. But this reflects the current reality of politics - both sides are more interested in blame than giving the electorate a clear view of their choices.

So, let me give it a try. I add the disclaimer that I am NOT an economist, and I am sure many economists would ridicule my explanation as overly simplistic. You judge for yourselves.

Everyone agrees we are in the middle of a bad situation. To use a fairly standard analogy, the economy is on fire.
--> Democrats want to beat the fire by spending more. They want to use borrowed money to build the economy faster than the fire can destroy it.
--> Republicans want to beat the fire by spending less. They want to fix the underlying causes of the fire right away, trusting the fire to go out on its own, which will eventually allow new building to resume safely in the future.

But both sides are dismissive of the opposition:
--> Democrats say the Republican plan is like revising building codes in the middle of a fire - it does nothing for those suffering NOW.
--> Republicans say the Democratic plan is like adding fuel to the fire while it is still burning - it may make it harder to see in the short-term, but in the long term it just makes the fire worse.

The problem is, a "fire" is a bad analogy for analyzing the Economy. A fire attacks concrete things, destroying them, requiring people to grow new trees, mine new steel, and use human labor to put it all back together. The Economy, on the other hand, is a more nebulous concept. Value is something which exists in the mind of a human being, based on some "real" factors (like supply and demand) but also based on intangible factors (like desire and status). Value can be created from nothing - consider what you are buying when you buy a baseball card or purchase a Netflix subscription - and can be destroyed without anything concrete having been destroyed (as when a writer is found guilty of plagiarism or fraud). The economy is not built on debt or savings, but rather on HOPE.

Look at it this way.
--> If you have HOPE to have a family, you'll buy a house for them. If you have no hope, why bother?
--> If you have HOPE that you'll have a job tomorrow, you'll take the time to buy more than the essentials. If not, you'll hoard what you have.
--> If you have HOPE to eventually become employed, you'll invest time, money, effort in education. If not, you'll look for ways to pass the time.
--> If you have HOPE that you'll be repaid, you'll extend a loan. If not, you'll keep the money to yourself and invest in treasury bonds.

So, do Democrats or Republicans have the right solution? Neither. Both. It is not a question of finding the right value for a variable in the equation. It is a matter of convincing people there is HOPE for the future, so they will act, spend, and invest. And at the moment, all the Federal Government has done is convince people to look elsewhere for HOPE.

Keep that in mind this next election season.

Do programmers find it hard to be Christians?

When I was growing up, I loved science - biology, geology, physics, meteorology all fascinated me. But my teachers told me the same thing again and again, "It is impossible to be a scientist and a Christian. So, if you choose to become a scientist, be ready to throw away your faith forever." As a middle schooler, that scared me and made me reconsider my future career. But as I grew in knowledge of science and of my faith, I quickly learned the battle between science and religion was largely a myth. Most scientists have a faith, and most of the faithful respect and study science.

So, I was unhappy to see this same old idea recast in a new light, which claims programmers and Christians are incompatible. Most of you know I work in the Information Technology field, and have been a programmer at various points in my life/career. I have never found my faith to conflict with my job/hobby... and neither have almost any of the programmers I work with. And my particular company hires from all over, so I know programmers who are Catholic, Protestant, Coptic, Muslim, Jain, Hindu, Buddhist, and Orthodox.

This persistent idea that Christianity and logic are somehow in fundamental disagreement needs to be taken down. Some of the greatest thinkers of history (Thomas Aquinas, C.S. Lewis, Isaac Newton, etc.) were Christians, and none could be said to be enemies of logic or science, and none would be enemies of programming if they lived today.

What job would you have in the Star Wars universe?

Originally posted here. I wound up as a Death Star Laser Operator. Hmmm... Not quite the super jedi hero I'd hoped for, but hopefully I'd have a better health plan

This is FAR too logical for management