1>0
I’ve been scratching my head often over the last few years with a question that has been burning in my head, “Why is there such a gulf between conservatives and liberals? Why can we not seem to find common ground?”
Last week I was on the edge of my toilet hanging a clock, the porcelain was wet, I slipped, hit my head on the sink and the answer came flooding into my brain, “1>0”. There it was, the bridge between two very different ways at looking at something and why the two have not been able to reconcile, the answer to the very question that had plagued me. Taking my new found epiphany to the net as well as putting it to the challenge vs knowledge I already possessed was fascinating- but where to begin? Oh, but of course, a quote…
“A boy of 15 who is not a democrat is good for nothing, and he is no better who is a democrat at 20.” -John Adams
You might have heard similar quotes using “heart” and “brain”, the concept remains the same however and the underlining root causation is what I want to draw attention to. What defines a boy? A girl? What defines a man? A woman? Is the process not the road map of learning, growth, and development? What has a boy/girl not learned at the age of 15 that makes being a liberal “understandable” and what did they learn by the time they are 25 to make them conservative? I dare say, 1>0.
“Oh come on now, seriously? I know that 1>0…”
Do you? If a conservative leaning individual came to you with a single quantitative sample and you as a liberal could give him/her literally zero quantitative samples of the antagonist in return would you or would you not concede on the point at hand? If you answered “yes” dare I say “welcome aboard, you are no longer a liberal you are officially a conservative!”, if you however answered “No- I need more information before-” congratulations you are a liberal.
The thread that binds all liberals together is simply that they refuse to accept that 1 is in fact greater than 0 and then go about doing everything they can to try and somehow change it; whereas the thread that binds all conservatives together is simply the realization that 1 is in fact greater than 0, while accepting the fact that there is nothing they can do to change that. This is all fine and dandy but how does this relate to actual issues? Well, it literally relates to every single issue-
Socialism/Social Policies
I will keep this brief as possible to stress the simplicity of the problem at hand, not out of laziness on my part. There will be repetition.
Russia’s failed system = 1
Socialistic non-failed/failing countries = 0
Conservative gleans “1>0 = Socialism doesn’t work.”
Liberal gleans “All those 0’s didn’t know what they were doing, let’s make that 0 a 1… somehow… and then maybe make that new 1 better than all the others on the other side of the equation”
Social Security failed/failing= 1
Socialistic non-failed/failing policies= 0
Conservative gleans “1>0 = Socialistic policy doesn’t work.”
Liberal gleans “All those 0’s didn’t know what they were doing, let’s make that 0 a 1… somehow… and then maybe make that new 1 better than all the others on the other side of the equation”
Gun Control/2nd Amendment/Tyrannical Governments
Australia’s violent crime went up after gun control= 1
Violent crime going down after gun control= 0
Conservative gleans “1>0 = “Gun control doesn’t lower violent crime.”
Liberal gleans “All those 0’s didn’t know what they were doing, let’s make that 0 a 1… somehow… and then maybe make that new 1 better than all the others on the other side of the equation”
“A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.” - George Washington
Quote from founding father stating clearly intent of 2nd amendment= 1
Quote from founding father(s) stating clearly anything else= 0
Conservative gleans “1>0 = This must be the founding fathers’ intent on the 2nd amendment.”
Liberal gleans “That zero can’t be right, let’s keep looking… indefinitely…”
Germany’s tyrannical government slaughtered millions of unarmed civilians= 1
Tyrannical governments that slaughtered millions of armed civilians= 0
Conservative gleans “1>0 = an armed civilian base prevents mass slaughter of citizens.”
Liberal gleans “We can’t be sure that an armed civilian population works… trust government.”
Tea Party vs BLM
BLM have killed cops, spewed hate crimes, destroyed private property all on record= 1
Tea Party murders/ recorded hate crimes/ private property destroyed= 0
Conservative gleans “1>0 = “Tea Party members are not racist, criminals or murders while BLM are.”
Liberal gleans “BLM members are not racist, criminals or murders on a whole, while Tea Party members are… on a whole… we just haven’t caught them yet.”
One could literally go down every major talking point one and a time and showcase this repeating phenomena over and over again, and it is by no means a mistake or a fluke- it is a learned behavior, or rather an ill-informed behavior.
To understand why people fail to grasp 1>0 you first have to understand the scientific method. The widely accepted steps of the scientific method are:
1. Observation/Question
2. Hypothesis/Prediction
3. Testing/Experiment
4. Analysis/Conclusion
Simply put, one views something, draws ideas about why it might be, tests said ideas, and then draws a conclusion based on analysis- so how does this relate? Using the example above one might observe/ask the question “does communism/socialism work?” They would then formulate ideas and predictions and proceed to test said ideas. When the data came back “Communist Russia failed with millions upon millions dead” and not a single quantitative piece of antagonistic evidence the analysis/conclusion would be “1>0= Communism/Socialism does not work”. Now, would the pursuit of knowledge end there? No. People can then (and should) challenge said analysis/conclusion with further testing- however the fact remains that the truth is still “Communism/Socialism does not work” until someone can provide a quantitative antagonist to the existing analysis/conclusion.
Here in lies the problem for a “liberal mindset” will not accept truth for that which their preconceived ideas conflict; they are continuously challenging the concept of 1>0 due to their confirmation bias. What is confirmation bias? Confirmation bias is when someone formulates an idea and/or a prediction and then proceeds to throw out any and all qualitative data found through testing that does not fit with their original mindset and draw their analysis/conclusion based on their formulated ideas rather than the qualitative data. Where a conservative challenges and tests for the sake of knowledge, and truth which they believe will progress mankind, a liberal challenges known truths and knowledge for the sake of their preconceived ideas which they believe will progress mankind. Do you see it now? A conservative pursues 1>0, or in other words “truth” for they believe that “the truth will set you free” while a liberal pursues the active destruction of 1>0, or in other words “the active destruction of accepted truths” because they conflict with their “perceived ideas”.
If you went up to a liberal and asked them “would you actively seek to destroy accepted truths for the sake of making a better tomorrow that you have envisioned for the world” I dare say that you would have every, single, one of them say “yes” emphatically. How do those standing on the “1” side of the bridge reconcile with those standing on the “0” side of the bridge? I’ll save that conversation for another time…
Written by Micah T English
July 22 2016
Last week I was on the edge of my toilet hanging a clock, the porcelain was wet, I slipped, hit my head on the sink and the answer came flooding into my brain, “1>0”. There it was, the bridge between two very different ways at looking at something and why the two have not been able to reconcile, the answer to the very question that had plagued me. Taking my new found epiphany to the net as well as putting it to the challenge vs knowledge I already possessed was fascinating- but where to begin? Oh, but of course, a quote…
“A boy of 15 who is not a democrat is good for nothing, and he is no better who is a democrat at 20.” -John Adams
You might have heard similar quotes using “heart” and “brain”, the concept remains the same however and the underlining root causation is what I want to draw attention to. What defines a boy? A girl? What defines a man? A woman? Is the process not the road map of learning, growth, and development? What has a boy/girl not learned at the age of 15 that makes being a liberal “understandable” and what did they learn by the time they are 25 to make them conservative? I dare say, 1>0.
“Oh come on now, seriously? I know that 1>0…”
Do you? If a conservative leaning individual came to you with a single quantitative sample and you as a liberal could give him/her literally zero quantitative samples of the antagonist in return would you or would you not concede on the point at hand? If you answered “yes” dare I say “welcome aboard, you are no longer a liberal you are officially a conservative!”, if you however answered “No- I need more information before-” congratulations you are a liberal.
The thread that binds all liberals together is simply that they refuse to accept that 1 is in fact greater than 0 and then go about doing everything they can to try and somehow change it; whereas the thread that binds all conservatives together is simply the realization that 1 is in fact greater than 0, while accepting the fact that there is nothing they can do to change that. This is all fine and dandy but how does this relate to actual issues? Well, it literally relates to every single issue-
Socialism/Social Policies
I will keep this brief as possible to stress the simplicity of the problem at hand, not out of laziness on my part. There will be repetition.
Russia’s failed system = 1
Socialistic non-failed/failing countries = 0
Conservative gleans “1>0 = Socialism doesn’t work.”
Liberal gleans “All those 0’s didn’t know what they were doing, let’s make that 0 a 1… somehow… and then maybe make that new 1 better than all the others on the other side of the equation”
Social Security failed/failing= 1
Socialistic non-failed/failing policies= 0
Conservative gleans “1>0 = Socialistic policy doesn’t work.”
Liberal gleans “All those 0’s didn’t know what they were doing, let’s make that 0 a 1… somehow… and then maybe make that new 1 better than all the others on the other side of the equation”
Gun Control/2nd Amendment/Tyrannical Governments
Australia’s violent crime went up after gun control= 1
Violent crime going down after gun control= 0
Conservative gleans “1>0 = “Gun control doesn’t lower violent crime.”
Liberal gleans “All those 0’s didn’t know what they were doing, let’s make that 0 a 1… somehow… and then maybe make that new 1 better than all the others on the other side of the equation”
“A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.” - George Washington
Quote from founding father stating clearly intent of 2nd amendment= 1
Quote from founding father(s) stating clearly anything else= 0
Conservative gleans “1>0 = This must be the founding fathers’ intent on the 2nd amendment.”
Liberal gleans “That zero can’t be right, let’s keep looking… indefinitely…”
Germany’s tyrannical government slaughtered millions of unarmed civilians= 1
Tyrannical governments that slaughtered millions of armed civilians= 0
Conservative gleans “1>0 = an armed civilian base prevents mass slaughter of citizens.”
Liberal gleans “We can’t be sure that an armed civilian population works… trust government.”
Tea Party vs BLM
BLM have killed cops, spewed hate crimes, destroyed private property all on record= 1
Tea Party murders/ recorded hate crimes/ private property destroyed= 0
Conservative gleans “1>0 = “Tea Party members are not racist, criminals or murders while BLM are.”
Liberal gleans “BLM members are not racist, criminals or murders on a whole, while Tea Party members are… on a whole… we just haven’t caught them yet.”
One could literally go down every major talking point one and a time and showcase this repeating phenomena over and over again, and it is by no means a mistake or a fluke- it is a learned behavior, or rather an ill-informed behavior.
To understand why people fail to grasp 1>0 you first have to understand the scientific method. The widely accepted steps of the scientific method are:
1. Observation/Question
2. Hypothesis/Prediction
3. Testing/Experiment
4. Analysis/Conclusion
Simply put, one views something, draws ideas about why it might be, tests said ideas, and then draws a conclusion based on analysis- so how does this relate? Using the example above one might observe/ask the question “does communism/socialism work?” They would then formulate ideas and predictions and proceed to test said ideas. When the data came back “Communist Russia failed with millions upon millions dead” and not a single quantitative piece of antagonistic evidence the analysis/conclusion would be “1>0= Communism/Socialism does not work”. Now, would the pursuit of knowledge end there? No. People can then (and should) challenge said analysis/conclusion with further testing- however the fact remains that the truth is still “Communism/Socialism does not work” until someone can provide a quantitative antagonist to the existing analysis/conclusion.
Here in lies the problem for a “liberal mindset” will not accept truth for that which their preconceived ideas conflict; they are continuously challenging the concept of 1>0 due to their confirmation bias. What is confirmation bias? Confirmation bias is when someone formulates an idea and/or a prediction and then proceeds to throw out any and all qualitative data found through testing that does not fit with their original mindset and draw their analysis/conclusion based on their formulated ideas rather than the qualitative data. Where a conservative challenges and tests for the sake of knowledge, and truth which they believe will progress mankind, a liberal challenges known truths and knowledge for the sake of their preconceived ideas which they believe will progress mankind. Do you see it now? A conservative pursues 1>0, or in other words “truth” for they believe that “the truth will set you free” while a liberal pursues the active destruction of 1>0, or in other words “the active destruction of accepted truths” because they conflict with their “perceived ideas”.
If you went up to a liberal and asked them “would you actively seek to destroy accepted truths for the sake of making a better tomorrow that you have envisioned for the world” I dare say that you would have every, single, one of them say “yes” emphatically. How do those standing on the “1” side of the bridge reconcile with those standing on the “0” side of the bridge? I’ll save that conversation for another time…
Written by Micah T English
July 22 2016