Idealism Without Illusion
Just the other day a friend told me I was right wing, this was like being slapped in the face but at the same time it was a reminder that the current wokeness of the extreme left is not something that I embrace.
I have pretty much always considered myself to be more politically left wing than anything else and my voting style has reflected this.
I am now on the cusp of my seventh decade and while I am still a firm believer in fluidity I also believe that I am more pragmatic than I have been in the past and that my rose coloured glasses have come off.
I have little agreement for what is now considered left as well has having little in common with the more traditional right wing view.
So I find myself in the centre which does not mean that I have compromised my more radical views in any way. What it does mean is that I am far more willing to view each situation on its merits more than from a tribal viewpoint.
Wikipedia sums it up quite well but differs in that it calls it radical centrism which sort of works as a tag… “the radical in the term refers to a willingness on the part of most radical centrists to call for fundamental reform of institutions. The centrism refers to a belief that genuine solutions require realism and pragmatism, not just idealism and emotion.” This sort of works for me although I must admit that I still have a tendency to be somewhat tribal.
In the past year or so I have been listening to the views of people who I consider to be educated, articulate and experienced in the fields that they discuss. I try hard to listen to both sides of social issues, science, philosophy even though I will admit that I make my mind up about something and tend to view it primarily from that angle. Sometimes I can become biased. But if I come across an argument that is contrary to my beliefs but convincing I am more than willing to take it on board. I find that this keeps me open to new ideas and doesn’t restrict the flow of knowledge and ideas.
I’m not going to pretend that I know about too many things in depth but I tend to look at information like I do food. It sustains me and gives me the wherewithal to have fresh ideas and viewpoints which sometimes has the potential to lead me to having my own realizations about life and living.
These moments of realisation are very gratifying and form the basis of my current reality.
I would despise being stuck on a viewpoint unless I had almost total certainty that it was true for me. That’s the great thing about life and learning, there is always another layer to peel back to reveal treasures that you never conceived could have existed.
I have noticed that I don’t overtly try to force my viewpoints on others, at least I don’t do this consciously. This doesn’t mean that I do not want to share my beliefs and understanding of life with others. I am more than happy to talk and debate with anyone who is interested. Having said that I am not willing to debate with a person or persons who are stuck on a viewpoint and who do not have the ability to explore other possibilities. To have a meaningful discussion involves respect, compassion and a willingness to listen to the viewpoints of others. As long as they are their own viewpoints and not dogma or data that has been hypnotically implanted and not considered or explored by the individual. In other words “manipulative politically motivated generalities”.
The term “think for yourself” is brandished around in many circles and while I essentially agree with the concept I still believe that you have to have the correct data to evaluate in order to think for yourself and this isn’t always the case.
So yes, I do have viewpoints that fall to the right and I have viewpoints that fall to the left but I am trying hard to be as open as I possibly can to any workable, functional data that can explain phenomena to me.
I am trying hard to apply these principles to the current world situation and the response of mankind to the pandemic and the social, economic, health and philosophical ramifications. At times this is proving to be harder than I would like it to be because there is so much tribalism, polarization, false information (on both sides) and underlying all of this is our ability to assimilate and evaluate knowledge and “understand scientific evaluation. Like anything, the outcome of discovery can be bent to serve the master wielding the power.
Last night I listened to a discussion by 3 doctors who all seem to be intelligent and objective. I’ve put a link to the podcast below. I’m doing this to attempt to show an example of what I consider a meaningful debate to be.
