Progressive Myths by Huemer is on my list now. CPR's Caitlyn Kim and the game of telephone. Let's get something Strait.
Progressive Myths by Huemer is on my list now.
I saw Mr. Armstrong's recent op ed (see the link below) and found it intriguing. Worth a look.
In it he details (reviews?) CU philosophy professor Michael Huemer's book "Progressive Myths".
I'm intrigued, enough so that I put the book on my reading list. I look forward to giving it a look.
I will leave it to you to read the op ed (and/or book), but I wanted to touch one one of my own pet-peeve Progressive myths. I'm not sure whether it appears in Huemer's book; forgive me some duplication if that's the case.
The myth is not so much a news story (as many of the examples listed in the op ed and in Huemer's book seem to be) as it is an assumption. The assumption is that there is one and only one legitimate way to respectfully treat others, and that they are the only ones who get to decide what way that is.
I reject this and so should you. There is more than one way to be a decent, upstanding, kind, and compassionate person. There is more than one way to show respect and humanity.
Don't have any hesitation in reminding others of this.
"I understand this is how you like to respond, but I believe it's just as valid to [fill in the blank]."
https://pagetwo.completecolorado.com/2024/09/24/armstrong-cu-professor-michael-huemer-progressive-myths/
CPR's Caitlyn Kim and the game of telephone...
Do you know what I mean if I say the game of telephone? That's where you get a line of people (the more the better) and whisper something in the ear of the first person in line.
This first whispers to the second, and so on until it gets to the last person in line. The last person says what they heard out loud to the joy of all because the message has often been hilariously garbled beyond its original meaning by that point.
CPR's Caitlyn Kim recently garbled (I say this diplomatically to not put motive to her actions since I didn't ask her to explain her choice) some news of her own.
I refer here to a recent story she wrote and which I linked to first below. In that story, she makes a claim about some voters' concerns over election integrity and Donald Trump. To bolster this claim, she references back to an NPR poll. I link to the NPR article discussing their poll second below for convenience.
Take a look at screenshot 1 attached. This has Kim's quote (labeled "CPR") and the relevant bit from NPR's poll article (labeled "NPR").
Take a look at the absolute certainty in Kim's wording: election integrity concerns are "in large part due to former President Donald Trump's false statements."
Now go look at the more equivocal statement in NPR. I underlined it in red. Concerns here are "driven in large part" and the claim is the result of what "experts" have said.
Catch the difference? Subtle but there.
Let's put aside the usual reporter's trick of editorializing by saying that experts have said something (to which you should always ask "which experts, and what did they say exactly?"), and focus here on how we go from a possible connection in NPR to a certainty in Kim's CPR.
The best I can tell, the claim that Trump is driving election concerns has to do with what you see in blue in the screenshot. I.e. that because it's mostly Trump voters that have concerns it must be that Donald Trump is driving his supporters into having concerns.
Perhaps reasonable, certainly there are those that have concerns because they're following Trump's lead. A solid, causal connection for everyone with concerns? That's more a stretch if you ask me.
When you see things that appear to be connected, or when you see one thing that follows another, the temptation to assume they are causally related is front and center. This is part of being equipped to face our world with a human brain.
Being careful and thoughtful about what you think, however, means that the first thing you should do is work your damnedest to find reasons that argue AGAINST a connection.
I'll give you one. Perhaps the people that vote for Trump had concerns prior to his saying anything. Perhaps they have concerns that have nothing to do with the claims Trump made.
Merely finding two things next to each other doesn't mean that one caused another.
If Kim were interested in giving you a fuller and more thoughtful picture of reality, she would have been more careful in both her reading and her writing. She could have relayed the results of NPR's poll about those who have election concerns without the overlay of her own editorializing ON TOP OF NPR's. She could have allowed for a fuller picture of voters' worries.
But maybe doing that would've left less room for SOS Griswold to quip.
https://www.cpr.org/2024/10/14/how-colorado-keeps-noncitizens-dead-people-from-voting-election-security/
https://www.npr.org/2024/10/03/nx-s1-5130284/election-concerns-voter-fraud-trump-harris-poll
Amarillo by Morning...
Ah, the last post on a Friday. That means no more posts til Sunday. It also means time for something fun.
Fair warning: if you are the type that tends to get songs stuck in your head, turn away now. And don't come back!
When students ask me what kind of music I listen to, I tell them I listen to a little bit of everything. I mean it too.
Classical, foreign, rap, country, heavy metal, blues, jazz, the list goes on,
I don't go by any set rotation; more often than not opening YouTube on my computer will bring up suggested videos with songs I like but haven't heard in a while.
George Strait bubbled up to the surface recently and so I thought I'd share a couple of his songs that I really enjoy: I Can Still Make Cheyenne and Amarillo By Morning.
They're linked below.
If you've not ever heard them, give them a listen. If you have, give them another.
Got a favorite song from the Country genre? Feel free to put your favorite in the comments below.
Okay, you convinced me. One more. The third link below is to a favorite (makes me laugh) David Allen Coe song. Enjoy it too--especially the ending stanza!
That's it for today. Hope your Friday ends well and back at it Sunday.