[skidmarksdiecast]

Originally Posted by Cardinal

The shallow level of discourse shown by the preceding posts only goes to prove what Al Gore is highlighting in his book, namely that reasoned discussion in the political (and other) arenas in the US has been lost to 'infotainment'. Partisanship and lack of tolerance have damaged the ability of many in the US (and elsewhere) to engage in discussions on serious issues without resorting to name-calling and smart-ass comments. Regrettably, superficial approaches to complex issues have become the order of the day, fed by an insatiable media and those that lap up the latest news of scandal and hearsay - so long as the ratings are high who cares about the 'truth' .

Al Gore doesn't carry much credibility here in the States. He often purports himself as an expert while only having fundamental knowlege. You'd get much better information, on global warming, if you read something on the subject by, say, Carl Sagan, rather than Al Gore.

[Cardinal]

Originally Posted by skidmarksdiecast

Al Gore doesn't carry much credibility here in the States. He often purports himself as an expert while only having fundamental knowlege. You'd get much better information, on global warming, if you read something on the subject by, say, Carl Sagan, rather than Al Gore.

C'mon folks, how many times must I repeat myself - T_H_I_S ---- B_O_O_K ---- I_S---- N_O_T --- A_B_O_U_T ---- G_L_O_B_A_L ---- W_A_R_M_I_N_G (you lot seem to be obsessed with global warming )


(BTW, I'm sure that the millions of people who support him [Gore] feel he has a modicum of credibility - in the 'States' that is.)

[Cardinal]

Originally Posted by jim

Whoa Cardinal, a well informed population will not do at all. The powers that be want a stupid ill informed population. It just would not do at all if the general population were allowed to think for themselves.

Whatever next, people making their own decisions?

The government in Britain has spent a lot of time and effort to ensure we dont think for ourselves.

Dont worry everything will be OK, the nanny state will take care of everything , wont it?

Too true Jim, all too true - but one can live in hope!

[TopHat]

Originally Posted by Cardinal

C'mon folks, how many times must I repeat myself - T_H_I_S ---- B_O_O_K ---- I_S---- N_O_T --- A_B_O_U_T ---- G_L_O_B_A_L ---- W_A_R_M_I_N_G (you lot seem to be obsessed with global warming )

So..... I guess it's about his invention of the internet, then?


I originally asked what was his thesis and no one seems to have an answer.

The blurb on Amazon provides little insight:

"Gore's larger goal in this book is to explain how the public sphere itself has evolved into a place hospitable to reason's enemies, to make us more aware of the forces at work on our own minds, and to lead us to an understanding of what we can do, individually and collectively, to restore the rule of reason and safeguard our future. Drawing on a life's work in politics as well as on the work of experts across a broad range of disciplines, Al Gore has written a farsighted and powerful manifesto for clear thinking."


I don't want to know what his goal is. I'd like to know what his arguments are.

[Cardinal]

Originally Posted by TopHat

So..... I guess it's about his invention of the internet, then?


I originally asked what was his thesis and no one seems to have an answer.

TopHat, read post#10 again and consult the extensive reviews (both positive and negative) on amazon.com. (Even if you don't like the guy or subscribe to his politics you may find that he makes some extremely valid arguments relating to the functioning of democracy - a word and practice that still has an important meaning for some.)

[flyXwire]

One thing I would like to say about Al Gore is that he's one huge hypocrite when it comes to not practicing what he preaches! I won't sight any examples that's not already common-knowledge out there, so that's all I'm going to say about that...

[Shawn 507]

Originally Posted by Cardinal

Shawn, the book "The Assault on Reason" isn't about 'global warming' which, as you've pointed out, has been discussed ad nauseum. It does seem to be a sincere attempt at discussing what is required to have a democracy informed by reason i.e. a well informed citizenry that is equipped with the ability to critically analyse crucial issues in a non-partisan and reasonably objective/dispassionate manner.

OK I stand corrected on the book's topic. However, Al Gore has no clout with me and those I know. To live in a society that is equipped with the ability to critically analize crucial issues in a non-partisan and reasonably objective / dispassionate manner is a pipe dream. You'd have to take away lobbyists and every other special interest group, and that aint happening anytime soon.
- Shawn

[Shawn 507]

Originally Posted by skidmarksdiecast

You'd get much better information, on global warming, if you read something on the subject by, say, Carl Sagan, rather than Al Gore.

Carl Sagan is dead and most of his horror stories of nuclear winter have been proven false. Another "The sky is falling" type. Can't say I miss him and his billions and billions of subatomic particles.
- Shawn

[Cardinal]

Originally Posted by Shawn 507

OK I stand corrected on the book's topic. However, Al Gore has no clout with me and those I know. To live in a society that is equipped with the ability to critically analize crucial issues in a non-partisan and reasonably objective / dispassionate manner is a pipe dream. You'd have to take away lobbyists and every other special interest group, and that aint happening anytime soon.
- Shawn

Agreed Shawn, with regard to it being in some respects a 'pipe dream', but it is nevertheless an ideal that should at least be striven for notwithstanding those who'll always be around promoting their own self-interest over others (in particular the ubiquitous special interest groups and lobbyists that advocate their own respective agendas).

(BTW anyone know the origin of the 'pipe-dream' expression - sounds a little like smoking [but not inhaling] strange herbal substances? )

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by Cardinal

...but it is nevertheless an ideal that should at least be striven for notwithstanding those who'll always be around promoting their own self-interest over others (in particular the ubiquitous special interest groups and lobbyists that advocate their own respective agendas).

...as opposed to the selfless politicians like Al Gore who only have society's best interest in mind?

The "public ignorance" debate has been going on in academia for quite some time now. Al Gore is NOT onto something new. The question I have is why he of all people should worry about the shallowness of public debate, since he is from the party that thinks a small elite (of politicians like him) should make all the decisions on how people should run their lives (through two primary means: taking as much money from them as possible to restrict their actual day-to-day options, and regulating everything to the nth degree). To me that shows he's just full of hot air. No credibility whatsoever. In reality, he wants people to stay ignorant so they will continue to be dependent on help from the regulatory/welfare state, ideally run by him and his buddies (I'm with Jim on this issue).

FVD

PS: The "public ignorance debate" is the academic term for the study of 1) how informed (or not-informed) people really are in Western democracies (there have been many surveys on this. The results are not good, at least in the US), and 2) whether this ignorance matters to the proper functioning of a democracy (some think it matters a great deal, others think it really doesn't, and that people can still vote "sensibly enough" while being ignorant of the most basic facts about politics, economics, etc...).