"What people say, what people do, and what they say they do
are entirely different things"--Margaret Mead,
Anthropologist[1]
"The more precisely the position is determined, the less
precisely the momentum is known in this instant, and vice versa"--Werner
Heisenberg, Physicist[2]
The talking heads of the news media have been reticent in
expressing their critical thinking as the debate between President
Bush and Senator Kerry ended. These talking heads all stated that
they had to wait for the results of opinion polls to be carried in
the next 72 hours before they could express their critical opinions.
Again, as I have repetitively stated in my past writing, I must
express my displeasure to the extent on how the ubiquitous
statistical polling play an undemocratic cumulative role in making
every social issue, an issue of pseudo-scientific division.
Anyhow, I felt a sense of relief when CNN correspondent John King
expressed his genuine feeling in regard to the squirming facial
expression of President Bush as he was participating in the
debate.[3]
What struck me most in this debate, is the fact that President
Bush and Senator Kerry provide two different visions to the American
people and indirectly to the world. President Bush provides his self
described world of CERTAINTY, while Senator Kerry provides, as Bush
says, a world of "CHANGE POSITION". So let us try to understand what
these two different visions are by starting to quote the relevant
portions of the debate in regard to the "certainty" of Bush’s world
and to the "change position" of Kerry’s world.
Bush: My concerns about the senator is that, in the
course of this campaign, I've been listening very carefully to what
he says, and he changes positions on the war in Iraq. He changes
positions on something as fundamental as what you believe in your
core, in your heart of hearts, is right in Iraq. You cannot lead if
you send mixed messages. Mixed messages send the wrong signals to
our troops. Mixed messages send the wrong signals to our allies.
Mixed messages send the wrong signals to the Iraqi citizens. And
that's my biggest concern about my opponent. I admire his service.
But I just know how this world works, and that in the councils of
government, there must be certainty from the U.S. president.
Kerry: But this issue of certainty. It's one thing to
be certain, but you can be certain and be wrong. It's another to be
certain and be right, or to be certain and be moving in the right
direction, or be certain about a principle and then learn new facts
and take those new facts and put them to use in order to change and
get your policy right. What I worry about with the president is that
he's not acknowledging what's on the ground, he's not acknowledging
the realities of North Korea, he's not acknowledging the truth of
the science of stem-cell research or of global warming and other
issues. And certainty sometimes can get you in trouble. [4]
In the course of figuring out my own understanding of these two
different worlds I found this partial definition of CERTAINTY:
Certainty is contextual. It is based on one's current knowledge. It
is possible to be certain, and still be wrong. Human beings are not
omniscient. They can form conclusions, but there is the possibility
of error. Humans need knowledge, though, and need a basis for
accepting knowledge as true. They cannot live constantly doubting
every piece of knowledge. To survive, they must be able to accept
knowledge as true, and act accordingly.[5]
Which vision is right? For me, Kerry’s vision of contextual
"change position" is right, and Bush’s resolute "certainty" is
wrong.
References
1. . Wikipedia Margaret Mead http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Mead
2. .. American Institute of Physics The Unceratinty Principle
http://www.aip.org/history/heisenberg/p08.htm
3. . Rosenfeld, Steven and Jan Frel Father Kerry vs. Boy George
October 1, 2004 AlterNet, http://www.aip.org/history/heisenberg/p08.htm
4. . FDCH E-Media Transcript: First Presidential Debate September
30, 2004 http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004a.html
5. . . Landauer, Jeff and Joseph Rowlands Certaint http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/index.html?
http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Epistemology_Certainty.html
|