It seems in the carrying out of policy, liberalism (in its standard definition) is juxtaposed by presumption, since a presumption stands its out ground until there is sufficient and conclusive evidence against it. If the evidence against it is not sufficient, the ruling is in favor of the status quo. Of course the status quo is not fully equivocal to conservative values, but rather conservatism in its more general sense (i.e. conserving certain ways of life and traditional values) seems to be protected by presumptions often times. For instance in the debate over climate change; it is challenging for those in favor of drastic measures to curb it are faced with the reluctance towards changing the status quo which keeps many coal workers employed. The status quo has the benefit of already having had its "trial run" and though its effects may be questionably righteous; what good it has produced can be used for evidence. Whereas the off putting-ness of a new proposal and the potential it has for failure cannot be so easily countered by its historical successes since it may have none or may not have ones which are applicable to the presented proposition.
Chapter five focuses primarily on identifying and developing propositions for problems that people think are relevant. It goes over 6 steps for choosing a valid proposition based on a perceived “feeling of doubt.” While all six steps may not be necessary, the collectively ensure a well thought out and firm proposition. The six steps include identifying the question, surveying implicated objectives (or understanding what is the goal accomplishment in regard to the question), searching for new information, considering alternative options, considering costs and risks of each potential proposition, and then finally choosing one of the propositions. The authors then go on to talk about analyzing and strengthening the proposition chosen. This includes identification and ranking of the issues that the proposition addresses as well as understanding how the decision makers will react to these issues and propositions. In general, with all these methods of critically analyzing the proposition, ...
I agree with this post and would like to elaborate further on some of its points.
ReplyDeleteEspecially with regards to climate change, it is easier to do nothing than it is to do something. This is a major presumption of those who oppose doing anything about it. I recently wrote a brief essay on the conservative governor candidate Jeff Johnson on this very topic. He says he believes that climate change is real, but he also opposes spending any money on it. He cited a lack of evidence that solutions will do anything, yet there is a wealth of evidence that indicates a variety of effective routes for reducing climate change. His argument supports the status quo through a convenient acceptance of something that has disrupted past presumptions about climate change. A far greater majority of people now agree that climate change is real and man-made. His argument on presumption then shifts to a new area: effective and possible solutions. Most people could not suggest solutions in a way that indicates most effective solutions, most cost-effective solutions, or a single simple route of fighting climate change. Johnson's argument is no longer based on a denial of climate change but a skepticism of solutions.
An argument against Jeff Johnson's general presumption that doing something is harder than doing nothing is the strong indication that life on earth will be jeopardized if nothing is done. It may be easy to avoid acting on climate change now, but the results will be disastrous and irreversible in the future. The UN report on climate change indicates an impending and catastrophic consequences in the near future if adjustments are not made. In this argument, the status quo is the enemy. Climate change has been occurring over the past two centuries and is occurring now. The results of maintaining the status quo indicate urgency and disaster. If the status quo is maintained, doing nothing will prove itself to be worse than doing something.