Food for thought

[jaunthie]

There's an interesting essay over at TPM Cafe. I don't necessarily agree with all the conclusions, but two passages struck home with me to the point where I'm deliberately NOT hiding this in lj-cuts. The first puts its finger exactly on why I'm so uncomfortable with fundamentalists in general and this administration in particular (emphasis added):

"Historians don’t like to make predictions, but I feel confident that when the professionals establish a consensus about the Bush II administration, a key element of it will be what is being discussed in these pages (can we call them that?) right now concerning the administration’s--if not the Republicans’—war on science: namely, their belief that reality doesn’t really matter when stacked against their ideology and agenda. Its not just science they reject. Look at their ideas about economics, diplomacy, and other areas of human behavior outside of those that are strictly scientific. Basically, they reject one of the major tenets of the Enlightenment, reason (right reason, i.e., rigorous reasoning based on the scientific method, leads to true knowledge) in favor of orthodoxy, for a return to the Age of Faith (here is revealed truth and that’s all you need to go on)."

I consider myself a child of and heir to the Age of Enlightenment, the Age of Reason. The idea that we as a country are returning to the Age of Faith, where facts don't matter, scares me silly. This is in no way a coincidence with the decrease in our society's capabilities in math, science, and critical thinking; the more illiterate our society grows in science and the humanities, the more prone we are to believing anything we're told.

So what can we do about it? This is something I've been worrying over for a long time, because so many of my generation seem to feel powerless to the point where they don't even want to know anymore. They tune out, not because they're not interested, but because they're so frustrated. But that's also a huge danger; our entire society was predicated on the premise of an informed, rational, thinking populace participating in the political process on a daily basis:

"Thomas Jefferson believed that it was the duty of every citizen to be informed so that he could discuss the issues facing his district, state or nation intelligently with his fellow citizens, work with those of a like mind to advocate for the policies they believed best, and then vote for the candidates who would support those policies. He also believed that every citizen had an obligation to hold elected or appointed office as needed or called upon."

We know this works, folks. We've seen the fundamentalist far right do exactly this; work with those of like minds to advocate for the Age of Faith policies they believed best, and vote for those candidates who support the suppression of facts in favor of "faith". We who believe in reason can and MUST do the same - and we must start now. We've already let things get far too out of hand, and time is not on our side. We already have an incredible amount of inertia to overcome and damage to undo. So let's start talking. Let's start looking for good, sound candidates at our local level, and work outwards from there. Starting anyplace is far better than never starting at all.

Edited to add: This is by no means to say that you cannot be religious AND be a firm proponent of reason. Some of our best scientific accomplishments as a species have been done by men and women who profoundly believed in their Gods and religions - but not so much so as to exclude reason and fact from their lives and their world views.

Comments

[hiker-chick.livejournal.com]

What are you thinking, perhaps a get-together before Nov. 8 in which each of several people researches a measure, reports back to the group, and leads a discussion? OK, so it won't lead to impeachment, but it could be useful (maybe even fun?).