Essentially, Joel Achenbach argues that an important human response is missing within our country and our government: Doubt. Achenbach comments on how even a brief appearance of uncertainty is construed as weakness. The author argues that, perhaps, doubt is vital in the pursuit of knowledge:
We need to rehabilitate doubt and uncertainty and recognize them as tools for cutting through mushy notions and wishful thinking. We need to stop elevating decisiveness over intelligence in the list of political virtues. We need leaders who think more like scientists, who know that knowledge is provisional, that today's orthodoxy might be invalidated tomorrow. We need to learn how to think again.
Achenbach writes that new books by Al Gore ("The Assault on Reason") and Christopher Hitchens ("God is Not Great") attack absolute knowledge as inferior to genuine longing for the unknown.
Democratic Presidential candidates will, as in the past, struggle with conveying to Americans that they are not "soft" on terrorism. This is largely in part to the perceived (and not always untrue) notion that Democrats do not show tactful resoluteness to terrorism. Republicans have much less to worry about as they are generally viewed by the public to be much stronger. Former Mayor Rudolf Giuliani has been particularly adamant about solidifying his association with September 11, 2001 and with that of being a strong counter-terrorism candidate.
One potential drawback to the Republican dominance of integrity and strength will be that of President Bush criticism. In part elected because of his "down to Earth" qualities, many now feel that the President is wandering in the clouds of absolute idealism. Some could be inclined to associate the administration's "resolve" as foolhardy and dangerous (many do now). This association with the Republican party may give Democrats a small, but important, advantage in the 2008 elections.
It was refreshing to hear a rare plea for the importance of doubt and uncertainty. However, like the author, I do not think the majority of Americans will quickly learn to embrace the humble brilliance of thoughtful doubt.
Achenbach writes that new books by Al Gore ("The Assault on Reason") and Christopher Hitchens ("God is Not Great") attack absolute knowledge as inferior to genuine longing for the unknown.
Democratic Presidential candidates will, as in the past, struggle with conveying to Americans that they are not "soft" on terrorism. This is largely in part to the perceived (and not always untrue) notion that Democrats do not show tactful resoluteness to terrorism. Republicans have much less to worry about as they are generally viewed by the public to be much stronger. Former Mayor Rudolf Giuliani has been particularly adamant about solidifying his association with September 11, 2001 and with that of being a strong counter-terrorism candidate.
One potential drawback to the Republican dominance of integrity and strength will be that of President Bush criticism. In part elected because of his "down to Earth" qualities, many now feel that the President is wandering in the clouds of absolute idealism. Some could be inclined to associate the administration's "resolve" as foolhardy and dangerous (many do now). This association with the Republican party may give Democrats a small, but important, advantage in the 2008 elections.
It was refreshing to hear a rare plea for the importance of doubt and uncertainty. However, like the author, I do not think the majority of Americans will quickly learn to embrace the humble brilliance of thoughtful doubt.
No comments:
Post a Comment