Political Compass Survey - for PTC1's benefit
Matt Wheeler
OK, i've done that political compass survey again, and at the same time
copied out all the questions with my answers so it gives a better idea of
why i'm a left liberal (according to the survey).
Apologies for the poor formatting, but here's my results and then the
questions....
Economic Left/Right: -3.06
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -2.41
--------------------------------------
If globalisation is inevitable, it should serve humanity rather than the
interests of trans-national corporations - Agree
I'd always support my country, whether it was right or wrong. - disagree
No one chooses their country of birth, so it's absurd to be proud of it. -
disagree
Our nation has many unique virtues. - Agree
The enemy of my enemy is my friend. disagree
Jews surely have to take some of the responsibility for their persecution
over the past 2000 years. - disagree
The growing fusion between information and entertainment is a worrying
contribution to the public's shrinking concentration span. - disagree
---------------------------
Class background determines peoples' consciousness more than their
membership of a particular nation - Agree
Controlling inflation is more important than controlling unemployment. -
disagree
Corporations cannot be trusted to voluntarily respect the environment. -
strongly agree
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need is a
fundamentally good idea. - agree
It's a sad reflection on our society that something as basic as drinking
water is now a consumer product. - agree
Land shouldn't be a commodity to be bought and sold. - diasagree
Many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and
contribute nothing to their society. - strongly agree
The only social responsibility of a company is to deliver a profit to its
shareholders - disagree
The rich, who often contribute much to society, are too highly taxed and too
little appreciated - strongly disagree
Those with the ability to pay should have the right to higher standards of
medical care and education. - agree
We'd be better off if companies simply told the truth, rather than spending
a fortune on manipulative consumer advertising. - agree
-------------------------------------
Abortion, when the mother's life is not threatened, should always remain
illegal - strongly disagree
All authority must be questioned. - disagree
An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.- strongly disagree
Education should involve enabling children to develop their own
personality. - agree
Everyone has their rights, but it is better for all of us that different
sorts of people should keep to their own kind. - disagree
Good parents sometimes have to spank their children, to teach them right
from wrong. - agree
It's natural for a child to keep some secrets from parents. - agree
Marijuana and hashish should be legalised. - strongly disagree
Schools pay too much attention to the arts and not enough towards their real
function - equipping the future generation to find jobs. - disagree
Significantly physically disabled people should not be allowed to
reproduce. - disagree
The most important lesson for all children is discipline and respect for
authority - agree
There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different
cultures - agree
Those who are able to work and do not should not expect to eat. - disagree
When a person is troubled, it's better not to think about it, but to keep
busy with more cheerful things. - disagree
When adults are entertaining, a child should be seen and not heard. -
disagree
---------------------------------
A government must give its citizens as much social freedom as possible. -
agree
A one-party state might serve us better than all the arguments that delay
progress in a democratic political system. - strongly disagree
Although the electronic age makes official surveillance easier, people who
haven't done anything wrong shouldn't be worried. - strongly agree
Capital punishment is a useful warning to potential criminals and would
reduce the number of serious crimes. - agree
In a civilised society, one must always have people above to obey and people
below to command. - agree
Abstract art doesn't represent anything and shouldn't be considered art at
all. - agree
In criminal justice, punishment is more important than rehabilitation. -
disagree
Social workers waste their time trying to rehabilitate those who are simply
born bad. - disagree
The businessman and the manufacturer are more important than the writer and
the artist - agree
The natural destination of a woman is to be a mother and a housewife. -
strongly disagree
Thinking globally and acting locally is a basically good idea. - agree
Young people may have some rebellious ideas, but it's normal to grow out of
them and settle down. - agree
----------------------------------------
Astrology can explain many more things than most people presently realise -
strongly disagree
Religion and morality are inseparable. - agree
Sex before marriage is always a sin - strongly disagree
Wars and social chaos may well be ended by a catastrophic flood or
earthquake. - agree
-----------------------------------------
A same sex couple in a stable, loving relationship, should not be excluded
from the possibility of child adoption. - agree
Homosexuality is a perversion that should be punished. - strongly disagree
Pornography, depicting consenting adults, should be legal for the adult
population. - agree
Sex and sin are two sides of the same coin. - strongly disagree
What goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults is no business
of the state - strongly agree
---------------------------------------------
Matt D'Cruz
If globalisation is inevitable, it should serve humanity rather than the
interests of trans-national corporations - Strongly agree, but this is an
incredibly loaded question.
I'd always support my country, whether it was right or wrong. - Strongly
disagree. You'd have to mad to agree with that one.
No one chooses their country of birth, so it's absurd to be proud of it. -
disagree. I still get irrationally excited whenever there's a British
sporting success. I don't get excited very often.
Our nation has many unique virtues. - Agree, to an extent. It also has many
failings, but the quiz doesn't ask that.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend - yeah right. Bollocks.
Jews surely have to take some of the responsibility for their persecution
over the past 2000 years. - strongly disagree
The growing fusion between information and entertainment is a worrying
contribution to the public's shrinking concentration span. - disagree. This
fusion, especially through TV, music and films, is in many ways opening
people's minds up towards things they wouldn't even think about - Eastenders
tackling 'difficult' social issues, for example.
Class background determines peoples' consciousness more than their
membership of a particular nation - I think I said I agreed, but I'm really
not sure about this one at all...
Controlling inflation is more important than controlling unemployment. -
strongly disagree
Corporations cannot be trusted to voluntarily respect the
environment. -strongly agree
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need is a
fundamentally good idea. - strongly agree
It's a sad reflection on our society that something as basic as drinking
water is now a consumer product. - agree
Land shouldn't be a commodity to be bought and sold. - diasagree
Many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and
contribute nothing to their society. - strongly agree, but another loaded
question.
The only social responsibility of a company is to deliver a profit to its
shareholders - badly phrased question (see post below)
The rich, who often contribute much to society, are too highly taxed and too
little appreciated - strongly disagree
Those with the ability to pay should have the right to higher standards of
medical care and education. - disagree
We'd be better off if companies simply told the truth, rather than spending
a fortune on manipulative consumer advertising. - agree
Abortion, when the mother's life is not threatened, should always remain
illegal - strongly disagree
All authority must be questioned. - strongly agree. EVERYTHING should be
questioned.
An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.- strongly disagree
Education should involve enabling children to develop their own
personality. - strongly agree
Everyone has their rights, but it is better for all of us that different
sorts of people should keep to their own kind. - strongly disagree
Good parents sometimes have to spank their children, to teach them right
from wrong. - disagree
It's natural for a child to keep some secrets from parents. - agree. I
don't believe there's anyone out there who doesn't.
Marijuana and hashish should be legalised. - strongly agree. I wish more of
the questions had been this straight.
Schools pay too much attention to the arts and not enough towards their real
function - equipping the future generation to find jobs. - strongly
disagree.
Significantly physically disabled people should not be allowed to
reproduce. - strongly disagree, I think I've discussed this before, but
there's no reason why a disabled person cannot have a healthy child.
The most important lesson for all children is discipline and respect for
authority - disagree. I'd never teach my children to respect a government I
disagree with, or a corrupt police force, or an incompetant teacher or boss
just because they happened to be in authority. Anyone who think otherwise
is in danger of setting a worrying example to their kids. But in terms of
discipline I agree it is important, but not THE most important lesson.
There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different
cultures - strongly agree
Those who are able to work and do not should not expect to eat. - strongly
disagree
When a person is troubled, it's better not to think about it, but to keep
busy with more cheerful things. - agree, but then again it's a badly phrased
question, so I'm not sure.
When adults are entertaining, a child should be seen and not heard. - and
when adults are boring, their children should tell them so.
A government must give its citizens as much social freedom as possible. -
strongly agree
A one-party state might serve us better than all the arguments that delay
progress in a democratic political system. - strongly disagree
Although the electronic age makes official surveillance easier, people who
haven't done anything wrong shouldn't be worried. - strongly disagree. In
any case, who's to judge what is 'wrong' or 'right' when everything is
potentially being observed and scrutinised?
Capital punishment is a useful warning to potential criminals and would
reduce the number of serious crimes. - strongly disagree. Punishment is not
a deterrant to crime, especially when you're in such a disadvantaged
position that the 'gains' of crime are more attractive than any other
prospect.
In a civilised society, one must always have people above to obey and people
below to command. - agree to an extent, although I wouldn't necessarily use
the words 'obey' and 'command', and not the terms above and below at all.
Abstract art doesn't represent anything and shouldn't be considered art at
all. - strongly disagree... not sure quite how this is supposed to gauge
your political standpoints, but hey...
In criminal justice, punishment is more important than
rehabilitation. -strongly disagree.
Social workers waste their time trying to rehabilitate those who are simply
born bad. - strongly disagree
The businessman and the manufacturer are more important than the writer and
the artist - disagree.
The natural destination of a woman is to be a mother and a housewife. -
strongly disagree
Thinking globally and acting locally is a basically good idea. - agree, but
this is yet another stupidly vague question.
Young people may have some rebellious ideas, but it's normal to grow out of
them and settle down. - strongly disagree - this is bollocks, as it assumes
that any kind of dissent is borne out of immaturity.
Astrology can explain many more things than most people presently realise -
like, who the hell CARES? What does this have to do with anything.
Religion and morality are inseparable. - strongly disagree - there are
hugely immoral people who think they devoutly religious, while it is stupid
to assume that atheists are inherently immoral.
Sex before marriage is always a sin - strongly disagree
Wars and social chaos may well be ended by a catastrophic flood or
earthquake. - yeah, they may be, but then it might have nothing to do with
religion at all.
A same sex couple in a stable, loving relationship, should not be excluded
from the possibility of child adoption. - strongly agree
Homosexuality is a perversion that should be punished. - strongly disagree
Pornography, depicting consenting adults, should be legal for the adult
population. - agree
Sex and sin are two sides of the same coin. - strongly disagree
What goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults is no business
of the state - strongly agree, unless the Prime Minister is accepting sexual
favours from a powerful businessman in exchange for preferential treatment
or something.
Darren Turner
I'd like to have a go myself.
EBD-thinks that personally hes somewhat right of Tony Benn, but, hey.
InfamousTerrrifying Union Bugbear II
> I'll try and do this properly, see if I can actually add something
useful...
And here are mine, for comparison's sake. Some of them I tried it first
with agree and second with disagree coz I really think maybe.. was left
liberal both times though.
> If globalisation is inevitable, it should serve humanity rather than the
> interests of trans-national corporations - Strongly agree, but this is an
> incredibly loaded question.
Strongly agree
> I'd always support my country, whether it was right or wrong. - Strongly
> disagree. You'd have to mad to agree with that one.
disagree
> No one chooses their country of birth, so it's absurd to be proud of it. -
> disagree. I still get irrationally excited whenever there's a British
> sporting success. I don't get excited very often.
agree
> Our nation has many unique virtues. - Agree, to an extent. It also has
many
> failings, but the quiz doesn't ask that.
agree
> The enemy of my enemy is my friend - yeah right. Bollocks.
agree
> Jews surely have to take some of the responsibility for their persecution
> over the past 2000 years. - strongly disagree
maybe (recent years, yes. Before, no)
> The growing fusion between information and entertainment is a worrying
> contribution to the public's shrinking concentration span. - disagree.
This
> fusion, especially through TV, music and films, is in many ways opening
> people's minds up towards things they wouldn't even think about -
Eastenders
> tackling 'difficult' social issues, for example.
agree.
> Class background determines peoples' consciousness more than their
> membership of a particular nation - I think I said I agreed, but I'm
really
> not sure about this one at all...
agree
> Controlling inflation is more important than controlling unemployment. -
> strongly disagree
disagree- though I don't really understand economics enough to know about
this one
> Corporations cannot be trusted to voluntarily respect the
> environment. -strongly agree
agree
> From each according to his ability, to each according to his need is a
> fundamentally good idea. - strongly agree
agree
> It's a sad reflection on our society that something as basic as drinking
> water is now a consumer product. - agree
agree
> Land shouldn't be a commodity to be bought and sold. - diasagree
agree
> Many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and
> contribute nothing to their society. - strongly agree, but another loaded
> question.
agree
> The only social responsibility of a company is to deliver a profit to its
> shareholders - badly phrased question (see post below)
disagree
> The rich, who often contribute much to society, are too highly taxed and
too
> little appreciated - strongly disagree
strongly disagree
> Those with the ability to pay should have the right to higher standards of
> medical care and education. - disagree
disagree
> We'd be better off if companies simply told the truth, rather than
spending
> a fortune on manipulative consumer advertising. - agree
agree
> Abortion, when the mother's life is not threatened, should always remain
> illegal - strongly disagree
again, a maybe.probably just closer to disagree.
> All authority must be questioned. - strongly agree. EVERYTHING should be
> questioned.
agree
> An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.- strongly disagree
strongly disagree
> Education should involve enabling children to develop their own
> personality. - strongly agree
agree
> Everyone has their rights, but it is better for all of us that different
> sorts of people should keep to their own kind. - strongly disagree
disagree
> Good parents sometimes have to spank their children, to teach them right
> from wrong. - disagree
maybe.
> It's natural for a child to keep some secrets from parents. - agree. I
> don't believe there's anyone out there who doesn't.
maybe. how old a child?
> Marijuana and hashish should be legalised. - strongly agree. I wish more
of
> the questions had been this straight.
agree
>
> Schools pay too much attention to the arts and not enough towards their
real
> function - equipping the future generation to find jobs. - strongly
> disagree.
disagree
> Significantly physically disabled people should not be allowed to
> reproduce. - strongly disagree, I think I've discussed this before, but
> there's no reason why a disabled person cannot have a healthy child.
strongly disagree - but not for the same reasons as Matt
> The most important lesson for all children is discipline and respect for
> authority - disagree. I'd never teach my children to respect a government
I
> disagree with, or a corrupt police force, or an incompetant teacher or
boss
> just because they happened to be in authority. Anyone who think otherwise
> is in danger of setting a worrying example to their kids. But in terms of
> discipline I agree it is important, but not THE most important lesson.
Disagree, stronlgy. the most important lesson (IMO) is that a child is
loved and valuable and has self-worth.
> There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different
> cultures - strongly agree
agree
> Those who are able to work and do not should not expect to eat. - strongly
> disagree
disagree
>
> When a person is troubled, it's better not to think about it, but to keep
> busy with more cheerful things. - agree, but then again it's a badly
phrased
> question, so I'm not sure.
disagree.
> When adults are entertaining, a child should be seen and not heard. - and
> when adults are boring, their children should tell them so.
disagree
>
> A government must give its citizens as much social freedom as possible. -
> strongly agree
agree
> A one-party state might serve us better than all the arguments that delay
> progress in a democratic political system. - strongly disagree
strongly disagree
> Although the electronic age makes official surveillance easier, people who
> haven't done anything wrong shouldn't be worried. - strongly disagree. In
> any case, who's to judge what is 'wrong' or 'right' when everything is
> potentially being observed and scrutinised?
disagree
> Capital punishment is a useful warning to potential criminals and would
> reduce the number of serious crimes. - strongly disagree. Punishment is
not
> a deterrant to crime, especially when you're in such a disadvantaged
> position that the 'gains' of crime are more attractive than any other
> prospect.
strongly disagree. I don't care how 'useful' it is, I think it's atrocious.
> In a civilised society, one must always have people above to obey and
people
> below to command. - agree to an extent, although I wouldn't necessarily
use
> the words 'obey' and 'command', and not the terms above and below at all.
maybe.
> Abstract art doesn't represent anything and shouldn't be considered art at
> all. - strongly disagree... not sure quite how this is supposed to gauge
> your political standpoints, but hey...
disagree. as to how it's political, Hitler once said ' If an artisit paints
the sky blue, and is lying, he should go to prison. If he sees the sky blue,
he is mad, and should go to an asylum'.
> In criminal justice, punishment is more important than
> rehabilitation. -strongly disagree.
strongly disagree
> Social workers waste their time trying to rehabilitate those who are
simply
> born bad. - strongly disagree
strongly disagree
>
> The businessman and the manufacturer are more important than the writer
and
> the artist - disagree.
disagree
>
> The natural destination of a woman is to be a mother and a housewife. -
> strongly disagree
maybe
> Thinking globally and acting locally is a basically good idea. - agree,
but
> this is yet another stupidly vague question.
agree. I get the feeling this is some deep political statement I'm meant to
know about, and realise how I am aligning yself when I agree with it.. but
I'm not sure.
> Young people may have some rebellious ideas, but it's normal to grow out
of
> them and settle down. - strongly disagree - this is bollocks, as it
assumes
> that any kind of dissent is borne out of immaturity.
maybe. It is normal for them to grow out of it. don't think that's a good
thing though.
> Astrology can explain many more things than most people presently
realise -
> like, who the hell CARES? What does this have to do with anything.
Strongly disagree. dunno, maybe pagans (as opposed to authorised religions
followers) are presumed to be more left wing?
> Religion and morality are inseparable. - strongly disagree - there are
> hugely immoral people who think they devoutly religious, while it is
stupid
> to assume that atheists are inherently immoral.
strongly disagree
> Sex before marriage is always a sin - strongly disagree
agree. But Of course, I'm being perdantic over their use of the (very
religious) word 'sin'
> Wars and social chaos may well be ended by a catastrophic flood or
> earthquake. - yeah, they may be, but then it might have nothing to do with
> religion at all.
maybe. why are they askng about religion anyway?
> A same sex couple in a stable, loving relationship, should not be excluded
> from the possibility of child adoption. - strongly agree
disagree. maybe
> Homosexuality is a perversion that should be punished. - strongly disagree
stronglydisagree
>
> Pornography, depicting consenting adults, should be legal for the adult
> population. - agree
maybe. depends on how consenting you think consenting is.
> Sex and sin are two sides of the same coin. - strongly disagree
Stronlgy disagree
> What goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults is no business
> of the state - strongly agree, unless the Prime Minister is accepting
sexual
> favours from a powerful businessman in exchange for preferential treatment
> or something.
agree
so very similar answers to matt. to be honest, I can't see how on most of
those anyone would say any different....
Tim, what did you put? you came out most right wing of us all...
Clarie
ptc1
news:9j44eg$3fe$1...@athena.ukc.ac.uk:
>> Thinking globally and acting locally is a basically good idea. -
>> agree, but this is yet another stupidly vague question.
>
> agree. I get the feeling this is some deep political statement I'm
> meant to know about, and realise how I am aligning yself when I agree
> with it.. but I'm not sure.
Yes, it's an old saying on the left.
There is nothing cryptic about it, though, it says what it
means. Basically, we're one big global village. You can't
change the world by trying to change the world at once.
If you act locally (within your community), and if everyone
does the same, then the final result will be global change.
Things have changed a bit since the saying was first invented.
Our notions of space and distance have changed thanks to
telecommunications and travelling technology...
- Phil
Lozette
Urgh, well, if anyone's interested...
(I turned out as a left-libertarian thingy whatsit)
> If globalisation is inevitable, it should serve humanity rather than the
> interests of trans-national corporations
Agree
> I'd always support my country, whether it was right or wrong.
Disagree
> No one chooses their country of birth, so it's absurd to be proud of it
Disagree
> Our nation has many unique virtues.
Agree
> The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Disagree (WWII/Cold War anyone?)
> Jews surely have to take some of the responsibility for their persecution
> over the past 2000 years.
Disagree
> The growing fusion between information and entertainment is a worrying
> contribution to the public's shrinking concentration span.
Agree
> Class background determines peoples' consciousness more than their
> membership of a particular nation
Agree
> Controlling inflation is more important than controlling unemployment.
Agree (gasp!)
> Corporations cannot be trusted to voluntarily respect the environment.
Strongly agree
> From each according to his ability, to each according to his need is a
> fundamentally good idea.
Uhm, not sure I quite understand this one, but I think I Disagree
> It's a sad reflection on our society that something as basic as drinking
> water is now a consumer product.
Agree
> Land shouldn't be a commodity to be bought and sold.
Disagree
> Many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and
> contribute nothing to their society.
Agree (oddly enough, this question doesn't explicitly say whether the
above is a good thing or bad thing...)
> The only social responsibility of a company is to deliver a profit to its
> shareholders
Strongly disagree
> The rich, who often contribute much to society, are too highly taxed and too
> little appreciated
Nnnggg..... I disagree with the first part and agree with the second.
So I put "Agree"
> Those with the ability to pay should have the right to higher standards of
> medical care and education.
Disagree
> We'd be better off if companies simply told the truth, rather than spending
> a fortune on manipulative consumer advertising.
Strongly agree
> Abortion, when the mother's life is not threatened, should always remain
> illegal
Strongly disagree
> All authority must be questioned.
Agree
> An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
Disagree
> Education should involve enabling children to develop their own
> personality.
Agree
> Everyone has their rights, but it is better for all of us that different
> sorts of people should keep to their own kind.
Strongly disagree
> Good parents sometimes have to spank their children, to teach them right
> from wrong.
Agree
> It's natural for a child to keep some secrets from parents.
Agree
> Marijuana and hashish should be legalised.
Personally I say decriminalised, perhaps not legalised - but Agree
> Schools pay too much attention to the arts and not enough towards their real
> function - equipping the future generation to find jobs.
Strongly disagree
> Significantly physically disabled people should not be allowed to
> reproduce.
Disagree
> The most important lesson for all children is discipline and respect for
> authority
Disagree
> There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different
> cultures
Strongly agree
> Those who are able to work and do not should not expect to eat.
Agree (gasp!)
> When a person is troubled, it's better not to think about it, but to keep
> busy with more cheerful things.
Disagree
> When adults are entertaining, a child should be seen and not heard.
Strongly agree
> A government must give its citizens as much social freedom as possible.
Agree
> A one-party state might serve us better than all the arguments that delay
> progress in a democratic political system.
Disagree
> Although the electronic age makes official surveillance easier, people who
> haven't done anything wrong shouldn't be worried.
Agree
> Capital punishment is a useful warning to potential criminals and would
> reduce the number of serious crimes.
Strongly disagree (I don't trust the judicial system to consistently
"get it right", we're only human after all)
> In a civilised society, one must always have people above to obey and people
> below to command.
Disagree
> Abstract art doesn't represent anything and shouldn't be considered art at
> all.
Strongly disagree
> In criminal justice, punishment is more important than rehabilitation.
Strongly disagree
> Social workers waste their time trying to rehabilitate those who are simply
> born bad.
Disagree
> The businessman and the manufacturer are more important than the writer and
> the artist
Strongly disagree
> The natural destination of a woman is to be a mother and a housewife.
Strongly disagree (biology isn't destiny)
> Thinking globally and acting locally is a basically good idea.
Agree
> Young people may have some rebellious ideas, but it's normal to grow out of
> them and settle down.
Disagree
> Astrology can explain many more things than most people presently realise
Disagree
> Religion and morality are inseparable
Strongly disagree
> Sex before marriage is always a sin
Stringly disagree
> Wars and social chaos may well be ended by a catastrophic flood or
> earthquake.
Agree
> A same sex couple in a stable, loving relationship, should not be excluded
> from the possibility of child adoption.
Agree
> Homosexuality is a perversion that should be punished.
Strongly disagree
> Pornography, depicting consenting adults, should be legal for the adult
> population.
Strongly agree
> Sex and sin are two sides of the same coin.
Strongly disagree
> What goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults is no business
> of the state
Strongly agree
And if you've read this far, you probably deserve a medal (or a life).
Laura.
Chris Lambert
I can't remember exactly what I put, particularly strong or not,
but...
> If globalisation is inevitable, it should serve humanity rather than the
> interests of trans-national corporations - Agree
Agree
> I'd always support my country, whether it was right or wrong. - disagree
disagree
> No one chooses their country of birth, so it's absurd to be proud of it. -
> disagree
> Our nation has many unique virtues. - Agree
agree
> The enemy of my enemy is my friend. disagree
disagree
> Jews surely have to take some of the responsibility for their persecution
> over the past 2000 years. - disagree
disagree
> The growing fusion between information and entertainment is a worrying
> contribution to the public's shrinking concentration span. - disagree
agree
> ---------------------------
> Class background determines peoples' consciousness more than their
> membership of a particular nation - Agree
agree
> Controlling inflation is more important than controlling unemployment. -
> disagree
disagree - although out of control inflation is not a good thing
> Corporations cannot be trusted to voluntarily respect the environment. -
> strongly agree
strongly agree
> From each according to his ability, to each according to his need is a
> fundamentally good idea. - agree
strongly agree
> It's a sad reflection on our society that something as basic as drinking
> water is now a consumer product. - agree
agree
> Land shouldn't be a commodity to be bought and sold. - diasagree
agree - but I'm not really sure. Some control on use has to be in
place.
> Many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and
> contribute nothing to their society. - strongly agree
agree
> The only social responsibility of a company is to deliver a profit to its
> shareholders - disagree
disagree
> The rich, who often contribute much to society, are too highly taxed and too
> little appreciated - strongly disagree
strongly disagree
> Those with the ability to pay should have the right to higher standards of
> medical care and education. - agree
strongly disagree
> We'd be better off if companies simply told the truth, rather than spending
> a fortune on manipulative consumer advertising. - agree
agree
> -------------------------------------
> Abortion, when the mother's life is not threatened, should always remain
> illegal - strongly disagree
agree
> All authority must be questioned. - disagree
agree
> An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.- strongly disagree
disagree - although punishments if they are used should be in proportion
to the crime which is what the bit in the bible originally intended :-)
> Education should involve enabling children to develop their own
> personality. - agree
agree
> Everyone has their rights, but it is better for all of us that different
> sorts of people should keep to their own kind. - disagree
disagree
> Good parents sometimes have to spank their children, to teach them right
> from wrong. - agree
agree - but it depends on what you mean by spank. It does seem to be more
violent than I would intend.
> It's natural for a child to keep some secrets from parents. - agree
not sure
> Marijuana and hashish should be legalised. - strongly disagree
not sure - but probably agree assuming:
1. the drugs are not adictive
2. there are controls on sale
3. Both +ve and -ve aspects of the drugs are publicised
> Schools pay too much attention to the arts and not enough towards their real
> function - equipping the future generation to find jobs. - disagree
disagree
> Significantly physically disabled people should not be allowed to
> reproduce. - disagree
strongly disagree
> The most important lesson for all children is discipline and respect for
> authority - agree
disagree - although it is *an* important lesson
> There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different
> cultures - agree
agree
> Those who are able to work and do not should not expect to eat. - disagree
agree - but this is asssuming that it means those that *choose* not to work
not those who can't get a job. I would also count things such as looking
after kids, looking after a home, voluntary work as work. I would not want
anyone to actually starve but I do think everyone who can work should do and
should not rely on other people.
> When a person is troubled, it's better not to think about it, but to keep
> busy with more cheerful things. - disagree
disagree - but not sure. Some things are best to try to forget but others need
to be confronted.
> When adults are entertaining, a child should be seen and not heard. -
> disagree
disagree
> ---------------------------------
> A government must give its citizens as much social freedom as possible. -
> agree
agree
> A one-party state might serve us better than all the arguments that delay
> progress in a democratic political system. - strongly disagree
disagree - although it *might*
> Although the electronic age makes official surveillance easier, people who
> haven't done anything wrong shouldn't be worried. - strongly agree
disagree
> Capital punishment is a useful warning to potential criminals and would
> reduce the number of serious crimes. - agree
strongly disagree
> In a civilised society, one must always have people above to obey and people
> below to command. - agree
disagree
> Abstract art doesn't represent anything and shouldn't be considered art at
> all. - agree
disagree
> In criminal justice, punishment is more important than rehabilitation. -
> disagree
disagree
> Social workers waste their time trying to rehabilitate those who are simply
> born bad. - disagree
strongly disagree
> The businessman and the manufacturer are more important than the writer and
> the artist - agree
disagree
> The natural destination of a woman is to be a mother and a housewife. -
> strongly disagree
disagree - although clearly women are designed to be mothers
> Thinking globally and acting locally is a basically good idea. - agree
agree
> Young people may have some rebellious ideas, but it's normal to grow out of
> them and settle down. - agree
agree - but I'm not sure if this is a good thing
> ----------------------------------------
> Astrology can explain many more things than most people presently realise -
> strongly disagree
strongly disagre
> Religion and morality are inseparable. - agree
agree
> Sex before marriage is always a sin - strongly disagree
agree
> Wars and social chaos may well be ended by a catastrophic flood or
> earthquake. - agree
Strange question - they might!
> -----------------------------------------
> A same sex couple in a stable, loving relationship, should not be excluded
> from the possibility of child adoption. - agree
agree
> Homosexuality is a perversion that should be punished. - strongly disagree
strongly disagree
> Pornography, depicting consenting adults, should be legal for the adult
> population. - agree
agree - but not entirely sure
> Sex and sin are two sides of the same coin. - strongly disagree
disagree
> What goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults is no business
> of the state - strongly agree
agree
> ---------------------------------------------
--
Chris Lambert
cd...@ukc.ac.uk
Matt D'Cruz
"Lozette" <loz...@hotmail.com> wrote
> > Those who are able to work and do not should not expect to eat.
>
> Agree (gasp!)
This is another badly phrased question, although I assume it's deliberately
using right wing rhetoric. If the question had read "those who are able to
work and do not because they can't be arsed, should not expect to receive
dole money from the state" then I would agree, because it's a waste of money
that could be used to help someone in genuine need. But "should not expect
to eat", ie perform one of the functions essential to retain life, then of
course not.
Darren Turner
news:Xns90E27B6C8B...@212.219.108.6:
> Can someone give me the url of this site: this sounds very interesting
> and I'd like to have a go myself.
> EBD-thinks that personally hes somewhat right of Tony Benn, but, hey.
>
Turns out I am actually slightly down and to the left of Tony Benn, which
somewhat surprised me! I shall be cancelling my membership of the Tory
party forthwith, and joining the Socialist Alliance.
EBD-shocked
Daniel Bennett
"Matt Wheeler" <nn...@007jbond.freeserve.co.uk> wrote
> If globalisation is inevitable, it should serve humanity rather than the
> interests of trans-national corporations - Agree
I can agree here.
> I'd always support my country, whether it was right or wrong. - disagree
Strongly disagree, my conscience would lie with whats right and wrong, not
my country in this case.
> No one chooses their country of birth, so it's absurd to be proud of it. -
> disagree
I disagree also, whats wrong with being proud of where you come from? Being
proud doesn't imply you have to boast about things...
> Our nation has many unique virtues. - Agree
Every country does.
> The enemy of my enemy is my friend. disagree
Disagree again, that would be very backstabbing a situation.
> Jews surely have to take some of the responsibility for their persecution
> over the past 2000 years. - disagree
Disagree also.
> The growing fusion between information and entertainment is a worrying
> contribution to the public's shrinking concentration span. - disagree
I disagree also.
> Class background determines peoples' consciousness more than their
> membership of a particular nation - Agree
Maybe.... I think it depends on a lot more factors than just two though.
> Controlling inflation is more important than controlling unemployment. -
> disagree
I think the two can go hand in hand. Long term supply side economics appears
to be doing this - (Natural rate of unemploymemt is the same regardless of
inflatiom, hence controlling inflation in the long run will not increase or
decrease unemplyment)
> Corporations cannot be trusted to voluntarily respect the environment. -
> strongly agree
Strongly agree, without regulation, they will cut corners.
> From each according to his ability, to each according to his need is a
> fundamentally good idea. - agree
Agree also, still not 100% sure I interpreted this one right though.
> It's a sad reflection on our society that something as basic as drinking
> water is now a consumer product. - agree
Strongly agree.
> Land shouldn't be a commodity to be bought and sold. - diasagree
I disagree also. It's human nature to be selfish, hence they need something
to call their own.
> Many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and
> contribute nothing to their society. - strongly agree
Ditto again.
> The only social responsibility of a company is to deliver a profit to its
> shareholders - disagree
Strongly disagree.
> The rich, who often contribute much to society, are too highly taxed and
too
> little appreciated - strongly disagree
Strongly disagree, I think those that should be paying more tax, go to tax
havens and hence the burden gets forced lower than it should be!
> Those with the ability to pay should have the right to higher standards of
> medical care and education. - agree
I'm not sure here. On one hand, surely if some people pay more, than this
money filters down, on the other hand, why should osme people have better
care than others. ?
> We'd be better off if companies simply told the truth, rather than
spending
> a fortune on manipulative consumer advertising. - agree
Strongly agree.
> -------------------------------------
>
> Abortion, when the mother's life is not threatened, should always remain
> illegal - strongly disagree
Strongly disagree also.
> All authority must be questioned. - disagree
disagree. Given the operative part here is 'ALL' authority. However some
parts maybe need to be kept in check.
> An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.- strongly disagree
Ditto.
> Education should involve enabling children to develop their own
> personality. - agree
Strongly agree.
> Everyone has their rights, but it is better for all of us that different
> sorts of people should keep to their own kind. - disagree
Strongly disagree.
> Good parents sometimes have to spank their children, to teach them right
> from wrong. - agree
disagree. I think other methods could be used.
> It's natural for a child to keep some secrets from parents. - agree
Agree
> Marijuana and hashish should be legalised. - strongly disagree
Ditto.
> Schools pay too much attention to the arts and not enough towards their
real
> function - equipping the future generation to find jobs. - disagree
Strongly agree.
> Significantly physically disabled people should not be allowed to
> reproduce. - disagree
Strongly disagree.
> The most important lesson for all children is discipline and respect for
> authority - agree
maybe. I don't think that is the most important lesson you learn as a child
though.
> There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different
> cultures - agree
Strongly agree.
> Those who are able to work and do not should not expect to eat. - disagree
disagree strongly.
> When a person is troubled, it's better not to think about it, but to keep
> busy with more cheerful things. - disagree
maybe. Sometimes its better to forget. Depends.
> When adults are entertaining, a child should be seen and not heard. -
> disagree
Strongly disagree.
> ---------------------------------
>
> A government must give its citizens as much social freedom as possible. -
> agree
Agree.
> A one-party state might serve us better than all the arguments that delay
> progress in a democratic political system. - strongly disagree
Strongly disagree.
> Although the electronic age makes official surveillance easier, people who
> haven't done anything wrong shouldn't be worried. - strongly agree
ditto.
> Capital punishment is a useful warning to potential criminals and would
> reduce the number of serious crimes. - agree
disagree. I don't believe in eye for an eye. This is legalised murder/GBH.
It is wrong!
> In a civilised society, one must always have people above to obey and
people
> below to command. - agree
maybe....
> Abstract art doesn't represent anything and shouldn't be considered art at
> all. - agree
strongly agree. (Although it could be argued as perception...)
> In criminal justice, punishment is more important than rehabilitation. -
> disagree
Strongly disagree.
> Social workers waste their time trying to rehabilitate those who are
simply
> born bad. - disagree
Strongly disagree.
> The businessman and the manufacturer are more important than the writer
and
> the artist - agree
agree to an extent, but each one serves its purpose. I think the latter two
are luxuries rather than essential.
> The natural destination of a woman is to be a mother and a housewife. -
> strongly disagree
Strongly diagree.
> Thinking globally and acting locally is a basically good idea. - agree
agreed
> Young people may have some rebellious ideas, but it's normal to grow out
of
> them and settle down. - agree
agree.
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Astrology can explain many more things than most people presently
realise -
> strongly disagree
maybe.
> Religion and morality are inseparable. - agree
disagree strongly.
> Sex before marriage is always a sin - strongly disagree
ditto.
> Wars and social chaos may well be ended by a catastrophic flood or
> earthquake. - agree
of course they might, doesn't mean the two are related.
> -----------------------------------------
>
> A same sex couple in a stable, loving relationship, should not be excluded
> from the possibility of child adoption. - agree
agree.
> Homosexuality is a perversion that should be punished. - strongly disagree
ditto.
> Pornography, depicting consenting adults, should be legal for the adult
> population. - agree
Agree.
> Sex and sin are two sides of the same coin. - strongly disagree
ditto
> What goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults is no business
> of the state - strongly agree
ditto.
Daniel
Matt Wheeler
"Daniel Bennett" <dan...@bennett35BLOBBY.freeserveBLOBBY.co.uk> wrote in
message news:9j4upp$6ut$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> "Matt Wheeler" <nn...@007jbond.freeserve.co.uk> wrote
>
>
> > Those with the ability to pay should have the right to higher standards
of
> > medical care and education. - agree
>
> I'm not sure here. On one hand, surely if some people pay more, than this
> money filters down, on the other hand, why should osme people have better
> care than others. ?
>
I had private schools and private healthcare in mind here. If people can
afford it, and want to use it, let them, it gives more money/capacity for
the NHS and state schools.
>
> > Good parents sometimes have to spank their children, to teach them right
> > from wrong. - agree
>
> disagree. I think other methods could be used.
>
I thought back to pet owning with this question. Sometimes the only way to
teach a dog or cat that something they are doing is wrong is to tap them on
the nose or slap them or something. In the same way i think to a small
smack/spank would help to teach a child that they have done something wrong.
Obviously it must be used in moderation, hence an agree instead of a strong
agree.
>
> > The most important lesson for all children is discipline and respect for
> > authority - agree
>
> maybe. I don't think that is the most important lesson you learn as a
child
> though.
>
I just think about what some kids get up to these days, throwing bricks at
buses and trains, graffitti, spitting in the street, and other abusive
behaviour. If they had been taught discipline and respect for authority,
there wouldn't be anywhere near as much youth crime or other youth problems
as we currently suffer in this country.
>
> > Capital punishment is a useful warning to potential criminals and would
> > reduce the number of serious crimes. - agree
>
> disagree. I don't believe in eye for an eye. This is legalised murder/GBH.
> It is wrong!
>
Fair point... maybe i tok the word "warning" too literally here, such that
the threat of capital punishment would be emphasised, but would actually
hardly ever, if not never be used unless very extreme circumstances dictated
it.
> > In a civilised society, one must always have people above to obey and
> people
> > below to command. - agree
>
> maybe....
>
Well, it certainly helps, otherwise i don't think much would get done. Think
about businesses, there is always someone above and below you, and they work
well. At school you have teachers above and the "lower years" below you. If
there was no authority figure there i fear it would descend into chaos, as
happened on a few occasions at my old employers when the IT managers would
disappear and there would only be the "regular" IT people about.... chaos...
too much chatting not enough work getting done.
>
> > The businessman and the manufacturer are more important than the writer
> and
> > the artist - agree
>
> agree to an extent, but each one serves its purpose. I think the latter
two
> are luxuries rather than essential.
>
Admittedly without the latter two the culture of the country would be
completely different, forget shakespeare, we'd all be enthusing about
Isambard Kingdom Brunel and Sir Christopher Wren. Rather than having a
balanced culture we'd probably be a heavily industrialist society, with
little/no "arts" coverage on TV or in school etc.
> > Astrology can explain many more things than most people presently
> realise -
> > strongly disagree
>
> maybe.
>
I think this question is a bit of a red herring, i can't see how political
belief can have any bearing on whether you believe that "fate" is written in
the stars.
> > Religion and morality are inseparable. - agree
>
> disagree strongly.
>
I "agree" because of religious wars. OK, a pretty heavy generalisation, but
it does seem as those any religions have different moralities on various
subjects, and they tend to stick to those. Perhaps as i've effectively
abandoned religion i see it differently to how others might.
>
> > Wars and social chaos may well be ended by a catastrophic flood or
> > earthquake. - agree
>
> of course they might, doesn't mean the two are related.
>
Yep, another red herring question as far as i can tell.
Matt
Matt D'Cruz
> > Those with the ability to pay should have the right to higher standards
of
> > medical care and education. - agree
>
> I'm not sure here. On one hand, surely if some people pay more, than this
> money filters down, on the other hand, why should osme people have better
> care than others. ?
Yeah, but money paid into private healthcare doesn't filter down into the
NHS, nor does it help anyone who can't pay. But the flipside of that coin
is that if I needed an operation that had a huge waiting list, and I had the
money to get it done privately then I would. But the only long-term
solution to this is to get some serious money invested into the NHS, and
it's great that politicians are finally starting to realise this, even if
the means are dubious.
> disagree. Given the operative part here is 'ALL' authority. However some
> parts maybe need to be kept in check.
No. As I've said before, EVERYTHING should be questioned. It doesn't mean
"all authority should be disagreed with", but you should at least bother to
debate it in your own mind. Otherwise you're liable to end up swallowing
myths. I find it mind-boggling that anyone disagrees with this.
> > Although the electronic age makes official surveillance easier, people
who
> > haven't done anything wrong shouldn't be worried. - strongly agree
Look, read this question again, paying attention to the wording. It
references the electronic age, but it doesn't specifically mean things like
Echelon. The question uses 'surveillance' as a blanket term, this could
mean anything, from having your email scanned to having your phone tapped or
hidden cameras placed in your home. In addition, if we were ever, for one
reason or another, to end up with a government composed of right wing or
left wing fascists, this could be very worrying indeed. Even if you were
doing nothing wrong, would you be happy to let this happen? As I've said,
what you may judge as being 'right' and 'wrong' does not necessarily
correspond to what the people 'surveying' you may think. Last year I put my
signature to the Free Satpal Ram petition
(http://www.asiandubfoundation.com/satpal/), but was warned beforehand that
it would mean having an MI5 file opened up under my name. So god knows what
else could be in there. Possible even this post. Some may call this
paranoid gibberish, but I believe it's the sort of thing people should be
seriously concerned about.
> > Abstract art doesn't represent anything and shouldn't be considered art
at
> > all. - agree
>
> strongly agree. (Although it could be argued as perception...)
Or it could be argued as a lack of understanding. This is roughly the
equivalent of people saying that experimental or avant-garde music isn't
proper music because it doesn't have a "proper tune", in that it indicates
that people aren't willing to challenge their preconceptions.
> The businessman and the manufacturer are more important than the writer
and
> the artist - agree
> agree to an extent, but each one serves its purpose. I think the latter
two
> are luxuries rather than essential.
Only if you view them as entertainment only, with no value for social,
political or cultural deconstruction/criticism. I wonder how many people
have (consciously or otherwise) had their opinions influenced by people like
John Lennon, Spike Lee, Shakespeare, Dylan, Public Enemy, EL Doctorow, Bob
Marley or whoever.
> > Young people may have some rebellious ideas, but it's normal to grow out
> of
> > them and settle down. - agree
Or alternatively, you could say that cultural attitudes evolve, and certain
ideas which are considered outlandish or rebellious become commonplace a
generation down the line.
Lozette
There were loads of badly phrased ones. I was taking that in a "basic
community", little red hen kinda way. That if there are a bunch of
people say farming, and one person can't get off hir arse and farm
like the others, why should they expect to get the benefits?
Laura.
Matt D'Cruz
teach a dog or cat that something they are doing is wrong is to tap them on
the nose or slap them or something. In the same way i think to a small
smack/spank would help to teach a child that they have done something wrong.
Obviously it must be used in moderation, hence an agree instead of a strong
agree."
Well, I was never spanked or hit as a child, and my life has not yet
descended into moral hell. Has it not occurred to you that parents who
regularly spank their children may be, at a very early age, instilling them
with a "physical violence helps you get your own way" mentality. I'm sure
there are parents on deprived council estates who have spanked their
children regularly only to see them grow up as criminals. Of course, I'm
sure the astonishing level of social deprivation and lack of opportunity has
nothing to do with this at all... it's because they weren't properly
discliplined as kids!
> I just think about what some kids get up to these days, throwing bricks at
> buses and trains, graffitti, spitting in the street, and other abusive
> behaviour. If they had been taught discipline and respect for authority,
> there wouldn't be anywhere near as much youth crime or other youth
problems
> as we currently suffer in this country.
I don't believe that anyone who makes statements like this can seriously
consider themselves to be libertarian, left-wing or otherwise. Yes,
discipline is important, but it is not the be all and end all. Trying to
convince these people (most of whom live in deprived areas where they feel
there is nothing better to fill up their time) that there is a realistic
alternative to the dead-end culture that in many cases leads to such
behaviour would be a start. Then maybe they wouldn't feel the need to say
"fuck it" to a system of an authority which essentially excludes them.
InfamousTerrrifying Union Bugbear II
> > > Those with the ability to pay should have the right to higher
standards
> of
> > > medical care and education. - agree
> >
> > I'm not sure here. On one hand, surely if some people pay more, than
this
> > money filters down, on the other hand, why should osme people have
better
> > care than others. ?
>
> I had private schools and private healthcare in mind here. If people can
> afford it, and want to use it, let them, it gives more money/capacity for
> the NHS and state schools.
I think the important words here are 'the right' to higher standards. This
is saying that 1) there are higher standards of healthcare, and 2) poorer
people do not have the right to it. I think we all have a right to the
same standard of healthcare - and that standard should be the best it
possible can be given the circumsatnces. No one has more of a right than I
do to better healthcare... whether they are a 'better' person, or 'richer'
or whatever. If they want it, then fine, it's their money. That's a
privalege, not a right.
> > > Good parents sometimes have to spank their children, to teach them
right
> > > from wrong. - agree
> I thought back to pet owning with this question. Sometimes the only way to
> teach a dog or cat that something they are doing is wrong is to tap them
on
> the nose or slap them or something. In the same way i think to a small
> smack/spank would help to teach a child that they have done something
wrong.
> Obviously it must be used in moderation, hence an agree instead of a
strong
> agree.
Again, what's the important word - and here, it's probably 'have to' (coz
we'd aregue all day wabout whether spank was better than slap or smack or
hit) I don't think good parents 'have to' spank their children - they have
other ways of dealing with behaviour. That's not to say good parents don't,
or that it harms their child.
> > > The most important lesson for all children is discipline and respect
for
> > > authority - agree
> I just think about what some kids get up to these days, throwing bricks at
> buses and trains, graffitti, spitting in the street, and other abusive
> behaviour. If they had been taught discipline and respect for authority,
> there wouldn't be anywhere near as much youth crime or other youth
problems
> as we currently suffer in this country.
But if they'd been taught self-respect, and had a value to their lives and a
vision of how they could make it worthwhile, and the means to get there...
well, they'd be less likely to do that stuff.
> > > Capital punishment is a useful warning to potential criminals and
would
> > > reduce the number of serious crimes. - agree
> >
> > disagree. I don't believe in eye for an eye. This is legalised
murder/GBH.
> > It is wrong!
> Fair point... maybe i tok the word "warning" too literally here, such that
> the threat of capital punishment would be emphasised, but would actually
> hardly ever, if not never be used unless very extreme circumstances
dictated
> it.
Then it wouldn't work as a deterrant anyway. Actuially, research has found
that it's not so much the severity of the punishment that is a deterrant,
but the likelihood of being caught...
> > > The businessman and the manufacturer are more important than the
writer
> > and
> > > the artist - agree
> >
> > agree to an extent, but each one serves its purpose. I think the latter
> two
> > are luxuries rather than essential.
> >
>
> Admittedly without the latter two the culture of the country would be
> completely different, forget shakespeare, we'd all be enthusing about
> Isambard Kingdom Brunel and Sir Christopher Wren. Rather than having a
> balanced culture we'd probably be a heavily industrialist society, with
> little/no "arts" coverage on TV or in school etc.
I disagreee on the fact that no person is ever more 'important' than any
other - it doesn't say important to whom, or to what. Whatever you do, you
are important, and have a role to play.
Clarie
--
The dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act out their dream
with open eyes, to make it possible.
T. E. Lawrence
Daniel Bennett
"Matt D'Cruz" <turni...@hotmail.com> wrote
> Yeah, but money paid into private healthcare doesn't filter down into the
> NHS, nor does it help anyone who can't pay. But the flipside of that coin
> is that if I needed an operation that had a huge waiting list, and I had
the
> money to get it done privately then I would. But the only long-term
> solution to this is to get some serious money invested into the NHS, and
> it's great that politicians are finally starting to realise this, even if
> the means are dubious.
"Money" filters down, when those who recieve the money who are in the
private health care business spend it. It's all part of the circulation of
money, thats what I meant, not your twisting to your own benefit.
> No. As I've said before, EVERYTHING should be questioned. It doesn't
mean
> "all authority should be disagreed with", but you should at least bother
to
> debate it in your own mind. Otherwise you're liable to end up swallowing
> myths. I find it mind-boggling that anyone disagrees with this.
I think many people are naturally inquisitive, I just think most is done
quickly and hence loads of time isn't spent on it.
> Look, read this question again, paying attention to the wording. It
> references the electronic age, but it doesn't specifically mean things
like
> Echelon. The question uses 'surveillance' as a blanket term, this could
> mean anything, from having your email scanned to having your phone tapped
or
> hidden cameras placed in your home. In addition, if we were ever, for one
> reason or another, to end up with a government composed of right wing or
> left wing fascists, this could be very worrying indeed. Even if you were
> doing nothing wrong, would you be happy to let this happen? As I've said,
> what you may judge as being 'right' and 'wrong' does not necessarily
> correspond to what the people 'surveying' you may think. Last year I put
my
> signature to the Free Satpal Ram petition
> (http://www.asiandubfoundation.com/satpal/), but was warned beforehand
that
> it would mean having an MI5 file opened up under my name. So god knows
what
> else could be in there. Possible even this post. Some may call this
> paranoid gibberish, but I believe it's the sort of thing people should be
> seriously concerned about.
I think filiming in peoples homes would be going too far, however external
filming doesn't bother me at all.
And yes it depends on your interpretation on the questions being asked. You
interpret them all in the extreme whereas I don't.
> Or it could be argued as a lack of understanding. This is roughly the
> equivalent of people saying that experimental or avant-garde music isn't
> proper music because it doesn't have a "proper tune", in that it indicates
> that people aren't willing to challenge their preconceptions.
I just think most of it is bollox. I 'had' to take art and music at school.
Music didn't bother me so much, but I absolutely detest art, and my F grade
in my 3rd year senior summed up my effort. Arts I think should be optional,
and also people who are good at these subjects should be encouraged more.
> Only if you view them as entertainment only, with no value for social,
> political or cultural deconstruction/criticism. I wonder how many people
> have (consciously or otherwise) had their opinions influenced by people
like
> John Lennon, Spike Lee, Shakespeare, Dylan, Public Enemy, EL Doctorow, Bob
> Marley or whoever.
I don't disagree, but at the end of the day, communication can be done in
different forms, not just writing, and art, well it doesn't appeal to so
many people as the production of items such as piped water (the pipes),
> Or alternatively, you could say that cultural attitudes evolve, and
certain
> ideas which are considered outlandish or rebellious become commonplace a
> generation down the line.
I think that is normal, I didn't say it was right or wrong.
Daniel
ptc1
> OK, i've done that political compass survey again, and at the same time
> copied out all the questions with my answers so it gives a better idea
> of why i'm a left liberal (according to the survey).
Ok, I've picked out the one's that I have a big problem with
and why I think this disqualifies you, IMO, as a 'left-liberal'
--------------------------------------
> The growing fusion between information and entertainment is a worrying
> contribution to the public's shrinking concentration span. - disagree
As we have seen and as you have recently admitted, when there
is a merger of entertainment and information (i.e, news in this
case) then only sensationalist and entertaining pieces will be
reported- and certainly not necessarily the most important ones.
> All authority must be questioned. - disagree
I would say this this disqualifies you in one fell swoop. How
can you be a progressive if you do not question authority?
This attitude is probably the single most dangerous and
anti-democratic attitude anyone can hold.
> Marijuana and hashish should be legalised. - strongly disagree
Either you still believe the propaganda about Marijuana or
you are trying to impose some sort of 'ethical' choice that
you yourself made on everyone else's private lives. This
is not a 'liberal' attitude.
> The most important lesson for all children is discipline and respect
> for authority - agree
Again this is extremely dangerous and wrong. All progressive
movements throughout history - the entire advancement of mankind -
has depended on people questioning authority and the establishment.
If people did not do this then we would all still be living in
medieval - or worse - conditions right now. The questioning of
authority is the sine qua non of someone who respects the rights
and dignity of man and somone who believes that democracy is right
and progress is possible. This cannot be overstated.
> Although the electronic age makes official surveillance easier, people
> who haven't done anything wrong shouldn't be worried. - strongly agree
Point number 2. You have some naive notion of a paternalistic,
benevolent state that is there to only advance the interest of
the people over which it rules. This notion is absurd and you
only have to examine our own state with an ounce of critical
attitude or the history of various states to see why this notion
is not just wrong, but dangerous.
"The Left"... is always suspicious of the state and the motives
for its actions.
> Capital punishment is a useful warning to potential criminals and would
> reduce the number of serious crimes. - agree
It doesn't actually... but that's another argument which we've had
before. Giving the state the power of life and death over its citizens
is neither 'left' nor 'liberal'.
> In a civilised society, one must always have people above to obey and
> people below to command. - agree
Why? What is your argument here? I don't have a problem with
'legitimate' authority - either fairly and democratically elected
rulers (within the proper context- not the pseudo-democracy we
have now) or because of their special knowlegde.. but there is
no prior reason that I can see that heirachies are needed in
order for society to exist. Maybe it is necessary.. can you
come up with an argument?
> Young people may have some rebellious ideas, but it's normal to grow
> out of them and settle down. - agree
Rather patronising. You're saying that only the youth, in their
idealism and youthful ignorance have reason to rebel. Everyone
else is so much wiser by the time they grow up that they see no
need to rebel - they've 'seen the light'.
> Religion and morality are inseparable. - agree
Well that's a load of crap and this argument has shown to be
crap on numerous occasions. The 'left' generally tends to
see religion as farcical and an illigitimate authority.
Morality can be based on universal human values, or other
foundations, that don't involve God or religion.
> Wars and social chaos may well be ended by a catastrophic flood or
> earthquake. - agree
Religious or environmental?
In summary, you're a Christian, not a 'left-liberal'. Leftists
have a strong mistrust of authority and have a progressive POV
of history which is predicated on that. Hence, they have a
strong mistrust for the state and it's institutions.
Some of your attitudes directly and explicitly contradict these
basic premises, which is why I don't believe you're a 'left-liberal'.
- Phil
--
"Freedom is participation in power."
-- Cicero
Chris Lambert
>> All authority must be questioned. - disagree
> I would say this this disqualifies you in one fell swoop. How
> can you be a progressive if you do not question authority?
> This attitude is probably the single most dangerous and
> anti-democratic attitude anyone can hold.
He didn't day authority shouldn't be questioned. He said not *all*
authority should be questioned. There is a *big* difference.
> Rather patronising. You're saying that only the youth, in their
> idealism and youthful ignorance have reason to rebel. Everyone
> else is so much wiser by the time they grow up that they see no
> need to rebel - they've 'seen the light'.
No - what it is saying is that it is that most young people rebel
to a certain extent but then it is *normal* to settle down. The
statement says nothing about the (in)correctness of it but simply
comments about the state of society.
--
Chris Lambert
cd...@ukc.ac.uk
Matt D'Cruz
> > The growing fusion between information and entertainment is a worrying
> > contribution to the public's shrinking concentration span. - disagree
>
> As we have seen and as you have recently admitted, when there
> is a merger of entertainment and information (i.e, news in this
> case) then only sensationalist and entertaining pieces will be
> reported- and certainly not necessarily the most important ones.
Interesting that we both interpreted this one completely differently -
I viewed it from an arts/entertainment/popular culture point of view
while you viewed it from a media-related standpoint. In the context
you've placed it, I agree with you, but I think it's a myth that "the
public" has a shrinking concentration span. I mean, the kind of
people who watch Big Brother religiously are hardly the same people
who in previous generations would have sat around reading Crime and
Punishment, are they? We're talking demographics here.
What interests me so much about the British media is that it reflects
what different groups of people consider important. For example, on
your average Salford council estate, very few of those who buy
newspapers regularly will be reading the Guardian, the Independent or
the Telegraph, will they? Most of them will be buying the Sun, the
Star and the Mirror, if anything at all. If you're working ten hours
a day in a shitty, monotonous dead-end job in an economically
fucked-up town just to keep your family clothed and fed, what have you
got to pin your hopes on, or too add a bit of variety or interest in
your life? Usually it's something like football, or soaps, or
celebrity gossip or whatever. This may seem unbelievable to you, but
there are people to whom Man City making it back into the Premiership,
or whether or not Paul and Helen get squelchy with each other is more
important than a protest going on hundreds of miles away, or even
which party is in power. The red-tops, of course, know this. Eddie
Izzard was right when he noted that the tabloids treat the news like a
soap opera - what is sensationalist keeps people hooked, and so
Portillo getting scuppered is just another plot which jostles for
front-page space alongside Beckham's United future or whoever Jordan
is shagging this week. If there's been a political uprising in Gabon
which doesn't directly affect Britain, the chances are it will be
reported somewhere in the Guardian, but in the Sun? Of course not,
because it's irrelevent to their target market. Then, of course, in
the middle of this multi-plotted soap Murdoch can have Richard
Littlejohn stick in a bit of anti-European propaganda or whatever else
suits his ends. It's a double-edged sword. People should not be
sitting around tutting about cultural decline or a shrinking attention
span or whatever, but trying to make sure people like this feel that
they have some more meaning in their lives.
Anyway, rant over, I'll keep my theses to myself next time ;)
Matt D'Cruz
Subject: Re: Political Compass Survey - for PTC1's benefit
References: <9j278p$20p$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk>
<9j7ncq$8co$1...@athena.ukc.ac.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.205.125.3ptc1 <pt...@you.know.where> wrote
> > The growing fusion between information and entertainment is a worrying
> > contribution to the public's shrinking concentration span. - disagree>
> As we have seen and as you have recently admitted, when there
> is a merger of entertainment and information (i.e, news in this
> case) then only sensationalist and entertaining pieces will be
> reported- and certainly not necessarily the most important ones.
Interesting that we both interpreted this one completely differently -
This isn't, of course, to imply that this applies only to the
tabloids, it happens right across the whole media spectrum. Other
newspapers do exactly the same thing, in varying degrees of subtlety,
relative to their respective target markets, this is merely the most
overt example.
Matt D'Cruz
> "Money" filters down, when those who recieve the money who are in the
> private health care business spend it. It's all part of the circulation of
> money, thats what I meant, not your twisting to your own benefit.
Now you're going off the point, the point is whether or those who earn
money should have the right to superior healthcare because they earn
more.
> I think many people are naturally inquisitive, I just think most is done
> quickly and hence loads of time isn't spent on it.
Well, I know you're proving that YOU don't spend much time on it, as
proved by this:
> I think filiming in peoples homes would be going too far, however external
> filming doesn't bother me at all.
> And yes it depends on your interpretation on the questions being asked. You
> interpret them all in the extreme whereas I don't.
But surely you should think out all possible connotations and
eventualities of this sort of thing, regardless of whether it's
extreme or not? I was using extreme examples to attempt to point out
the absurdity of statements like "people who have done nothing wrong
should not be worried".
> I just think most of it is bollox. I 'had' to take art and music at school.
> Music didn't bother me so much, but I absolutely detest art, and my F grade
> in my 3rd year senior summed up my effort. Arts I think should be optional,
> and also people who are good at these subjects should be encouraged more.
In which case, you should say "I don't like art", and not "most art is
bollocks", because the fact that you aren't interested in it means you
can't really be expected to make an informed comment on what does and
does not 'represent' something. I think I was somewhat hasty in
writing off this question - it's very good in terms of working out
what kind of a person you are. If you agree that abstract art doesn't
represent anything, than you're more likely to be the kind of person
that takes things at face value, doesn't feel the inclination to look
behind it or to question their own assumptions and preconceptions. I
think you're proving quite nicely which category you fall into.
In any case, abstract art DOES represent something (I'm not saying
it's all great stuff, a lot of it IS bollocks, but a lot is also
brilliant), because any work of art is more than just it's material
components - paint on a canvas for example. A work of art, be it
visual, musical, cinematic, literary or whatever has three parts to
it: 1. The artist's intention. 2. the communication (ie the painting
itself, or the book, or the performance) 3. the viewer's
interpretation. It is the intention that's important in this
discussion, and this is also why, whatever anyone says, a two year old
couldn't paint a Pollock or a Rothko.
> I don't disagree, but at the end of the day, communication can be done in
> different forms, not just writing, and art, well it doesn't appeal to so
> many people as the production of items such as piped water (the pipes),
Why, do you know a secret society unbeknownst to me which is
fascinated by piping? (Cue someone saying, "yes, they're called
plumbers".) I would say that the writer and the manufacturer and the
artist and even the businessman are equally important. Alternatively,
even if you have no interest in art, look at this materialistically -
art yields a lot of benefits through tourism (hence the establishment
of the Department of Culture, Media and Sport), thus being good for
the economy, people going to the theatre in London, for example, or
going to Paris just to see the Louvre. Also, the whole local economy
of Stratford-Upon-Avon is doing very nicely for itself because some
bloke who wrote plays was born there a few hundred years ago.
Matt Wheeler
"ptc1" <pt...@you.know.where> wrote in message
news:9j7ncq$8co$1...@athena.ukc.ac.uk...
> "Matt Wheeler" <nn...@007jbond.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
> news:9j278p$20p$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk:
>
> > OK, i've done that political compass survey again, and at the same time
> > copied out all the questions with my answers so it gives a better idea
> > of why i'm a left liberal (according to the survey).
>
> Ok, I've picked out the one's that I have a big problem with
> and why I think this disqualifies you, IMO, as a 'left-liberal'
> --------------------------------------
>
> > The growing fusion between information and entertainment is a worrying
> > contribution to the public's shrinking concentration span. - disagree
>
> As we have seen and as you have recently admitted, when there
> is a merger of entertainment and information (i.e, news in this
> case) then only sensationalist and entertaining pieces will be
> reported- and certainly not necessarily the most important ones.
>
OK. i admit, i didn't fully understand this question. However, newspapers,
at least the broadsheets, at least attempt to cover as much as possible,
whilst a 30 minute TV news bulletin can only cover a limited amount in any
respectable detail, so will therefore only cover the stories the editors
feel is most relevant/interesting to the viewers.
> > All authority must be questioned. - disagree
>
> I would say this this disqualifies you in one fell swoop. How
> can you be a progressive if you do not question authority?
> This attitude is probably the single most dangerous and
> anti-democratic attitude anyone can hold.
I think some authority should be questioned, but not all of it. If i felt
all authority should be left unquestioned i would have answered "Strongly
disagree".
.
>
> > Capital punishment is a useful warning to potential criminals and would
> > reduce the number of serious crimes. - agree
>
> It doesn't actually... but that's another argument which we've had
> before. Giving the state the power of life and death over its citizens
> is neither 'left' nor 'liberal'.
>
OK, i admit, i got this one wrong..... if i did the survey again i'd
disagree on this point...
> > In a civilised society, one must always have people above to obey and
> > people below to command. - agree
>
> Why? What is your argument here? I don't have a problem with
> 'legitimate' authority -
nor do i, which is why i agreed with the comment.
>
> > Young people may have some rebellious ideas, but it's normal to grow
> > out of them and settle down. - agree
>
> Rather patronising. You're saying that only the youth, in their
> idealism and youthful ignorance have reason to rebel. Everyone
> else is so much wiser by the time they grow up that they see no
> need to rebel - they've 'seen the light'.
>
I think Chris Lambert responded to this point better than i could....
> > Religion and morality are inseparable. - agree
>
> Well that's a load of crap and this argument has shown to be
> crap on numerous occasions. The 'left' generally tends to
> see religion as farcical and an illigitimate authority.
> Morality can be based on universal human values, or other
> foundations, that don't involve God or religion.
As a non-believer in religion, i see many historical disputes based around
religions come about because one group doesn't agree with the morals of the
other.
>
> > Wars and social chaos may well be ended by a catastrophic flood or
> > earthquake. - agree
>
> Religious or environmental?
>
eh ? This doesn't make sense. how can a catastrophic flood or earthquake be
anything other than environmental.
> In summary, you're a Christian, not a 'left-liberal'. Leftists
> have a strong mistrust of authority and have a progressive POV
> of history which is predicated on that. Hence, they have a
> strong mistrust for the state and it's institutions.
No... you are wrong. I'm not a Christian.
>
> Some of your attitudes directly and explicitly contradict these
> basic premises, which is why I don't believe you're a 'left-liberal'.
>
Fair enough, thats your opinion. Maybe then i should consider myself as more
a "centralist", neither left or right and neither authoritarian or
libertarian.....
Matt
la haine
message news:9j9rtk$fiq$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk:
> I think some authority should be questioned, but not all of it. If i felt
> all authority should be left unquestioned i would have answered "Strongly
> disagree".
What authority should never be questioned?
--
'...don't forget this club nearly went out of extinction last year.'
- Allan Smith, Talksport
ptc1
> "ptc1" <pt...@you.know.where> wrote in message
>> Ok, I've picked out the one's that I have a big problem with
>> and why I think this disqualifies you, IMO, as a 'left-liberal'
>> --------------------------------------
>> > The growing fusion between information and entertainment is a
>> > worrying contribution to the public's shrinking concentration span.
>> > - disagree
>> As we have seen and as you have recently admitted, when there
>> is a merger of entertainment and information (i.e, news in this
>> case) then only sensationalist and entertaining pieces will be
>> reported- and certainly not necessarily the most important ones.
> OK. i admit, i didn't fully understand this question. However,
> newspapers, at least the broadsheets, at least attempt to cover as much
> as possible, whilst a 30 minute TV news bulletin can only cover a
> limited amount in any respectable detail, so will therefore only cover
> the stories the editors feel is most relevant/interesting to the
> viewers.
The question deals with the way that Capitalism and money interest
distorts the news and other information through the mass media.
What you say above is correct, apart from the fact that it isn't
necessarily the most 'relevant', but often simply what is the most
entertaining. There are other 'natural' filters in place too.
For example, a newspaper often survives on advertising revenue..
if a newspaper chooses to publish a critical article on, say,
company X.. then company X might very well choose to withdrawal
their advertising from the newspaper. That is just one example.
This is the problem of the media under Capitalism.
>> > All authority must be questioned. - disagree
>> I would say this this disqualifies you in one fell swoop. How
>> can you be a progressive if you do not question authority?
>> This attitude is probably the single most dangerous and
>> anti-democratic attitude anyone can hold.
> I think some authority should be questioned, but not all of it. If i
> felt all authority should be left unquestioned i would have answered
> "Strongly disagree".
But that's incoherent. How do you determine which authority
to question, unless you question all authority? Don't confuse
'questioning authority' with 'respecting' or 'believing'
authority. Why not question ALL authority, and then respect
the authority that deserves your respect? Otherwise, you end
up believing in certain authority based purely on ideology or
tradition, etc.
>> > Capital punishment is a useful warning to potential criminals and
>> > would reduce the number of serious crimes. - agree
>> It doesn't actually... but that's another argument which we've had
>> before. Giving the state the power of life and death over its
>> citizens is neither 'left' nor 'liberal'.
> OK, i admit, i got this one wrong..... if i did the survey again i'd
> disagree on this point...
Cool.
>> > In a civilised society, one must always have people above to obey
>> > and people below to command. - agree
>> Why? What is your argument here? I don't have a problem with
>> 'legitimate' authority -
> nor do i, which is why i agreed with the comment.
I see, so you're saying that there is a case for 'legitimate'
authority in every society. Is that correct? I agree with that.
>> Rather patronising. You're saying that only the youth, in their
>> idealism and youthful ignorance have reason to rebel. Everyone
>> else is so much wiser by the time they grow up that they see no
>> need to rebel - they've 'seen the light'.
> I think Chris Lambert responded to this point better than i could....
I'll have a look again...
>> > Religion and morality are inseparable. - agree
>> Well that's a load of crap and this argument has shown to be
>> crap on numerous occasions. The 'left' generally tends to
>> see religion as farcical and an illigitimate authority.
>> Morality can be based on universal human values, or other foundations,
>> that don't involve God or religion.
> As a non-believer in religion, i see many historical disputes based
> around religions come about because one group doesn't agree with the
> morals of the other.
Inseperable or seperable? If you agree, as it appears you have
above, you're saying that you cannot have morality without religion.
Do you agree with that?
>> > Wars and social chaos may well be ended by a catastrophic flood or
>> > earthquake. - agree
>> Religious or environmental?
> eh ? This doesn't make sense. how can a catastrophic flood or
> earthquake be anything other than environmental.
I meant will it be due to climate change or some sort of
biblical amargeddon or great flood?
>> In summary, you're a Christian, not a 'left-liberal'. Leftists
>> have a strong mistrust of authority and have a progressive POV
>> of history which is predicated on that. Hence, they have a strong
>> mistrust for the state and it's institutions.
> No... you are wrong. I'm not a Christian.
Ok then, you're not a Christian. Sorry.
>> Some of your attitudes directly and explicitly contradict these
>> basic premises, which is why I don't believe you're a 'left-liberal'.
> Fair enough, thats your opinion. Maybe then i should consider myself as
> more a "centralist", neither left or right and neither authoritarian or
> libertarian.....
Perhaps. We'll leave it at that so we can continue debating
the specifics...
Matt Wheeler
"ptc1" <pt...@you.know.where> wrote in message
> "Matt Wheeler" <nn...@007jbond.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
> news:9j9rtk$fiq$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk:
>
> > "ptc1" <pt...@you.know.where> wrote in message
>
> >> Ok, I've picked out the one's that I have a big problem with
> >> and why I think this disqualifies you, IMO, as a 'left-liberal'
> >> --------------------------------------
>
>
> >> > and people below to command. - agree
>
> >> Why? What is your argument here? I don't have a problem with
> >> 'legitimate' authority -
>
> > nor do i, which is why i agreed with the comment.
>
> I see, so you're saying that there is a case for 'legitimate'
> authority in every society. Is that correct? I agree with that.
>
Yeah. Legitimate authority is good. I assumed that was what the question was
referring to. I, as many, would not appreciate it if people along and forced
authority on people without a "good" reason. For instance, someone joining a
group and trying to turn it to their own personal cause, and away from what
it was intended to be.
> >> > Religion and morality are inseparable. - agree
>
> Inseperable or seperable? If you agree, as it appears you have
> above, you're saying that you cannot have morality without religion.
> Do you agree with that?
>
Ah. ok. looks like i misunderstood this question. I have seen many instances
of what i believe is peoples morality brought about by their beliefs. But
this is by no means the same for everyone. So i "agreed" because i've seen
instances where it appears to be inseperable, although even when i first saw
the question, i did appreciate that there are situations where they aren't
inseperable. I think part of the problem is the answers provided for the
survey... "Strongly agree" "agree" "Disagree" and "Strongly disagree".
Because these answers didn't always fit "properly", i took them to mean as
follows:
Strongly agree - agree and it will always be like this.
Agree - agree, but appreciate at sometimes it won't be like that
Disagree - disagree, but appreciate sometimes the other side may happen.
Strongly disagree - never.
So when saying they are inseperable, i'm saying generally they are, but
there are times when they aren't.
> >> > Wars and social chaos may well be ended by a catastrophic flood or
> >> > earthquake. - agree
>
> >> Religious or environmental?
>
> > eh ? This doesn't make sense. how can a catastrophic flood or
> > earthquake be anything other than environmental.
>
> I meant will it be due to climate change or some sort of
> biblical amargeddon or great flood?
>
Ah... ok... now i see. If it were to happen, i would see it as an
astonishing but fortunate co-incidence. There could, however, be other
people who believe that it is "brought about" by "god". depends on what they
believe i guess.
Matt
Matt D'Cruz
> > contribution to the public's shrinking concentration span. - disagree>
> is a merger of entertainment and information (i.e, news in this
> case) then only sensationalist and entertaining pieces will be
> reported- and certainly not necessarily the most important ones.
Interesting that we both interpreted this one completely differently -
Matt D'Cruz
> > contribution to the public's shrinking concentration span. - disagree>
> As we have seen and as you have recently admitted, when there
> is a merger of entertainment and information (i.e, news in this
> case) then only sensationalist and entertaining pieces will be
> reported- and certainly not necessarily the most important ones.
Interesting that we both interpreted this one completely differently -
Matt D'Cruz
> private health care business spend it. It's all part of the circulation of
> money, thats what I meant, not your twisting to your own benefit.
Now you're going off the point, the point is whether or those who earn
money should have the right to superior healthcare because they earn
more.
> I think many people are naturally inquisitive, I just think most is done
> quickly and hence loads of time isn't spent on it.
Well, I know you're proving that YOU don't spend much time on it, as
proved by this:
> I think filiming in peoples homes would be going too far, however external
> filming doesn't bother me at all.
> And yes it depends on your interpretation on the questions being asked.
You
> interpret them all in the extreme whereas I don't.
But surely you should think out all possible connotations and
eventualities of this sort of thing, regardless of whether it's
extreme or not? I was using extreme examples to attempt to point out
the absurdity of statements like "people who have done nothing wrong
should not be worried".
> I just think most of it is bollox. I 'had' to take art and music at
school.
> Music didn't bother me so much, but I absolutely detest art, and my F
grade
> in my 3rd year senior summed up my effort. Arts I think should be
optional,
> and also people who are good at these subjects should be encouraged more.
In which case, you should say "I don't like art", and not "most art is
bollocks", because the fact that you aren't interested in it means you
can't really be expected to make an informed comment on what does and
does not 'represent' something. I think I was somewhat hasty in
writing off this question - it's very good in terms of working out
what kind of a person you are. If you agree that abstract art doesn't
represent anything, than you're more likely to be the kind of person
that takes things at face value, doesn't feel the inclination to look
behind it or to question their own assumptions and preconceptions. I
think you're proving quite nicely which category you fall into.
In any case, abstract art DOES represent something (I'm not saying
it's all great stuff, a lot of it IS bollocks, but a lot is also
brilliant), because any work of art is more than just it's material
components - paint on a canvas for example. A work of art, be it
visual, musical, cinematic, literary or whatever has three parts to
it: 1. The artist's intention. 2. the communication (ie the painting
itself, or the book, or the performance) 3. the viewer's
interpretation. It is the intention that's important in this
discussion, and this is also why, whatever anyone says, a two year old
couldn't paint a Pollock or a Rothko.
> I don't disagree, but at the end of the day, communication can be done in
> different forms, not just writing, and art, well it doesn't appeal to so
> many people as the production of items such as piped water (the pipes),
Why, do you know a secret society unbeknownst to me which is
Scottie
la haine <pa...@who.cares> wrote in message
news:9j9skn$8mh$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
> On 20 Jul 2001, Matt Wheeler (nn...@007jbond.freeserve.co.uk) wrote this
> message news:9j9rtk$fiq$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk:
>
> > I think some authority should be questioned, but not all of it. If i
felt
> > all authority should be left unquestioned i would have answered
"Strongly
> > disagree".
>
> What authority should never be questioned?
You will respect MY authoritaah.
Timmay
Daniel Bennett
"Matt D'Cruz" <turni...@hotmail.com> wrote
> Now you're going off the point, the point is whether or those who earn
> money should have the right to superior healthcare because they earn
> more.
On purely principle, I would say everyone is equal and deserves equal
benefits, but if it provided more money to the poorer in the long run
perhaps taxing private health companies might encourage more money into
public health and the richer hence paying more.
> Well, I know you're proving that YOU don't spend much time on it, as
> proved by this:
After working for and travelling most of the day, I don't generally spend
much time online when I get home, I'm usually a little on the tired side....
My point was, if a lot of things were bothering people, their say is heard
and listened to. It's a case of getting the balance between wants and needs
to keep as many people happy as possible.
> But surely you should think out all possible connotations and
> eventualities of this sort of thing, regardless of whether it's
> extreme or not? I was using extreme examples to attempt to point out
> the absurdity of statements like "people who have done nothing wrong
> should not be worried".
I can tell yours and Phils favourite film was 'Enemy Of The State'. General
filming covering wide areas is very useful for tracking criminals. I think
it should only be viewed in connection with criminal cases however or
searching for missing people etc - in towns. Any other use etc couldn't be
justified.
> In which case, you should say "I don't like art", and not "most art is
> bollocks", because the fact that you aren't interested in it means you
> can't really be expected to make an informed comment on what does and
> does not 'represent' something. I think I was somewhat hasty in
> writing off this question - it's very good in terms of working out
> what kind of a person you are. If you agree that abstract art doesn't
> represent anything, than you're more likely to be the kind of person
> that takes things at face value, doesn't feel the inclination to look
> behind it or to question their own assumptions and preconceptions. I
> think you're proving quite nicely which category you fall into.
'My' Opinion is Art is Bollocks. This doesn't make it fact, it's an
'opinion' or aren't these allowed in your 'free state' that you keep
proposing. Just because I look at Art at face value, as I find it
uninteresting at this moment in time - doesn't mean I look at everything at
face value, a good example is how you look at people etc.
> In any case, abstract art DOES represent something (I'm not saying
> it's all great stuff, a lot of it IS bollocks, but a lot is also
> brilliant), because any work of art is more than just it's material
> components - paint on a canvas for example. A work of art, be it
> visual, musical, cinematic, literary or whatever has three parts to
> it: 1. The artist's intention. 2. the communication (ie the painting
> itself, or the book, or the performance) 3. the viewer's
> interpretation. It is the intention that's important in this
> discussion, and this is also why, whatever anyone says, a two year old
> couldn't paint a Pollock or a Rothko.
But a two year old could paint abstract art....
Every person is different and finds different things as interesting and
uninteresting. Everything I write is opinion - not necessary fact (if it's
fact I usually try to back it up with some kind of source if I remember -
although I'm not quite so thorough as Phil as I'm not always trying to prove
something).
> Why, do you know a secret society unbeknownst to me which is
> fascinated by piping? (Cue someone saying, "yes, they're called
> plumbers".) I would say that the writer and the manufacturer and the
> artist and even the businessman are equally important. Alternatively,
> even if you have no interest in art, look at this materialistically -
> art yields a lot of benefits through tourism (hence the establishment
> of the Department of Culture, Media and Sport), thus being good for
> the economy, people going to the theatre in London, for example, or
> going to Paris just to see the Louvre. Also, the whole local economy
> of Stratford-Upon-Avon is doing very nicely for itself because some
> bloke who wrote plays was born there a few hundred years ago.
I wasn't denying that, I was something, production of more essential for
living items such as clean water (which requires piping) would be of higher
value than writing etc. However I also agree writing is very important in
the current times. You are possibly mis-interpreting me.
As I have explained to people I know re: text messages for example, you only
see what is written, not the context or the emotion or the meaning necessary
that was implied by it.
Daniel
Matt D'Cruz
> I can tell yours and Phils favourite film was 'Enemy Of The State'.
Thank you for informing me of that fact. I would have been under the
impression that I'd never seen it had you not done so.
General
> filming covering wide areas is very useful for tracking criminals. I think
> it should only be viewed in connection with criminal cases however or
> searching for missing people etc - in towns. Any other use etc couldn't be
> justified.
Fair enough, I agree here. I would say that there's probably evidence that
wider surveillance reduces the likelihood of violent crime in the areas in
question. Okay, it probably only drives it somewhere else, but hey ;) But
the question didn't specifically mention the use of electonic surveillance
for criminals in particular, although it's easy to assume it did. I think
it meant surveillance in a wide range of contexts (extreme or otherwise),
and in that sense, I would imagine you'd disagree with the statement.
> 'My' Opinion is Art is Bollocks. This doesn't make it fact, it's an
> 'opinion' or aren't these allowed in your 'free state' that you keep
> proposing.
I wasn't aware I'd made any such proposals. Would you care to point some
instances out for me?
> But a two year old could paint abstract art....
No they couldn't. A two year old could paint a splodge on a canvas, that
doesn't make it abstract art, any more I am performing John Cage's 4'33''
any time I remain silent for that length of time. Hence my point about
intention, communication and interpretation.
> I wasn't denying that, I was something, production of more essential for
> living items such as clean water (which requires piping) would be of
higher
> value than writing etc. However I also agree writing is very important in
> the current times. You are possibly mis-interpreting me.
Or possibly not. I think they are equally important, and have said so
earlier in this thread.
Daniel Bennett
> doesn't make it abstract art, any more I am performing John Cage's 4'33''
> any time I remain silent for that length of time. Hence my point about
> intention, communication and interpretation.
I'm not artist, and I do not enjoy or appreciate art as in 'painting' or
'drawing' etc. However a lot of abstract art I have seen just appears to be
random shapes, for which the title of the painting also appears to be
random..... Ok, a two year old would be 'too' random, but I think an 8 year
old could do it....
Daniel
Matt D'Cruz
> I'm not artist, and I do not enjoy or appreciate art as in 'painting' or
> 'drawing' etc.
Then you can't be expected to make an informed judgement about it or form an
opinion that stands up to anything approaching close scrutiny then, can you?
However a lot of abstract art I have seen just appears to be
> random shapes, for which the title of the painting also appears to be
> random..... Ok, a two year old would be 'too' random, but I think an 8
year
> old could do it....
*Hits head repeatedly against brick wall* Either I am incredibly bad at
expressing myself or you just aren't getting my point. They may APPEAR to
be just random shapes, but most of the time I think you'll find that the
composition of the work is anything but random. Yes, maybe an 8 year old
could paint a work of universally acclaimed visual art if they had a concept
that they were able to express through use of a brilliantly original and
unprecedented technique, but I doubt it. What you are doing is separating
the work from the concept behind it.
ptc1
news:jx367.58104$WS4.8...@news6-win.server.ntlworld.com:
>> > The growing fusion between information and entertainment is a
>> > worrying contribution to the public's shrinking concentration span.
>> > - disagree>
>> As we have seen and as you have recently admitted, when there
>> is a merger of entertainment and information (i.e, news in this
>> case) then only sensationalist and entertaining pieces will be
>> reported- and certainly not necessarily the most important ones.
> Interesting that we both interpreted this one completely differently -
> I viewed it from an arts/entertainment/popular culture point of view
> while you viewed it from a media-related standpoint. In the context
> you've placed it, I agree with you, but I think it's a myth that "the
> public" has a shrinking concentration span.
Actually, when I answered in the affermative, I was only refering
to the first part of the question, not the second...
But, I'll think about it now. See my comments below...
> People should not be
> sitting around tutting about cultural decline or a shrinking attention
> span or whatever, but trying to make sure people like this feel that
> they have some more meaning in their lives.
Oh, I entirely agree. This may sound patronising, but reading
such junk is indicative of the lower social-economic scale that
these people are in. The target audience for the Sun is not
exactly College graduates. I agree that reading such newspapers
is a very small social problem when compared to the very real
difficulties and injustices that people have in their day to
day lives. However, at the same time, the red tops for quite
some time now, have often been the more reactionary papers..
and in that respect is not exactly helping the situation.
> This isn't, of course, to imply that this applies only to the
> tabloids, it happens right across the whole media spectrum. Other
> newspapers do exactly the same thing, in varying degrees of subtlety,
> relative to their respective target markets, this is merely the most
> overt example.
Yes, of course, that's because of way that the mass media
operates under Capitalism. Broadsheets operate under the
same principles, but their demographic is different, so the
behaviour of the paper has to reflect that.
OTOH, the case can be made for a shrinking attention span..
What did people do for entertainmenet before TV came along?
Argue? Read books? Play sports? All three are far more
productive, IMO, than vegging in front of a TV with a remote
control and switching the channel whenever you get bored for
more than five seconds.
It's also the case that political speeches have steadily declined
in length since WWII. Now they average only a small fraction
of the length that they used to a few decades ago. I think
society as a whole.. or generally.. have become used to the
'instant reward' or 'instant gratification' of modern culture.
Hence, I think that it's quite possible that our attention
span may have dropped.
Matt D'Cruz
shorter in future?
"ptc1" <pt...@you.know.where> wrote in message
news:9jfpiv$e4f$1...@athena.ukc.ac.uk...
Abi
>> In any case, abstract art DOES represent something (I'm not saying
>> it's all great stuff, a lot of it IS bollocks, but a lot is also
>> brilliant), because any work of art is more than just it's material
>> components - paint on a canvas for example. A work of art, be it
>> visual, musical, cinematic, literary or whatever has three parts to
>> it: 1. The artist's intention. 2. the communication (ie the painting
>> itself, or the book, or the performance) 3. the viewer's
>> interpretation. It is the intention that's important in this
>> discussion, and this is also why, whatever anyone says, a two year old
>> couldn't paint a Pollock or a Rothko.
Hhmm, someone's been studying the aesthetics of art.
>But a two year old could paint abstract art....
AAAAAAAAAARGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGH do you know how annoying stupid statements like
that are? It just serves to show ignorance.
Abi
Abi
<9jfgsk$qt8$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>:
>
>"Matt D'Cruz" <turni...@hotmail.com> wrote
>> No they couldn't. A two year old could paint a splodge on a canvas,
>> that doesn't make it abstract art, any more I am performing John
>> Cage's 4'33'' any time I remain silent for that length of time. Hence
>> my point about intention, communication and interpretation.
>
>I'm not artist, and I do not enjoy or appreciate art as in 'painting' or
>'drawing' etc.
You don't have to be an artist to appreciate art, and art is not just
painting or drawing. Design, architecture, sculpture, craft, any form of
creation (in a man made sense).
> However a lot of abstract art I have seen just appears to
>be random shapes, for which the title of the painting also appears to be
>random.....
Then either you haven't seen enough or you haven't taken the time to try
and look and understand it properly. A lot of art requires some background
work being done- for example Howard Hodgekin names his works after holidays
or moods, so you'll see a work thats called 'Lunch in a French summer' and
is abstract, and is his representation of the sights, sounds, colours and
atmosphere of that instance.
Ok, a two year old would be 'too' random, but I think an 8
>year old could do it....
Dan dan dan...stop being so dense. You're not doing yourself any favours.
Abi
Moof
them up, and laid them out thusly:
> You don't have to be an artist to appreciate art, and art is not just
> painting or drawing. Design, architecture, sculpture, craft, any form of
> creation (in a man made sense).
fr
o o
o o
r f
w wn w
a dw a
l d l
l r l
grassgrassgrassgrassgrass
Moof
--
G.A.Radford_ | Moofing at you from Mallorca, Spain
|\/| _ _ |_ me@ | Coming soon to a web browser near you:
| |(_)(_)| .org.uk | Moof the Website - watch this space!
Lozette
answers. Has Phil himself detailed his? If he has, then I've probably
missed if because Google isn't so great. If not, why not? (apart from
the obvious - that we can guess his answers already, but fair's
fair.....)
Laura.
ptc1
news:1bbdbc8e.01072...@posting.google.com:
hehe. No problem. I'll get back with you shortly...
ptc1
Daniel Bennett
"Abi" <aw...@ukc.ac.uk> wrote
> You don't have to be an artist to appreciate art, and art is not just
> painting or drawing. Design, architecture, sculpture, craft, any form of
> creation (in a man made sense).
I think we were specifically referring to art as what you may find in
galleries which includes sculptures etc. After being forced to take Art at
school I have no interest in it in the slightest. I can see more in theatre
than in art. ( I realise this could be argued as a form of art).
> Then either you haven't seen enough or you haven't taken the time to try
> and look and understand it properly. A lot of art requires some background
> work being done- for example Howard Hodgekin names his works after
holidays
> or moods, so you'll see a work thats called 'Lunch in a French summer' and
> is abstract, and is his representation of the sights, sounds, colours and
> atmosphere of that instance.
>
And yes I'm aware your course consisted of art, but as a point I made in an
earlier post - which I thought would end this, I said this was my opinion.
Not eveyone can find any purpose for themselves in art.
> Dan dan dan...stop being so dense. You're not doing yourself any favours.
I was being sarcastic actually.... :-)
Daniel