Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian; durasell
Speaking only from my own understanding, I thought that his basic observation was a philosophical one, not related to your own Person at all -- he's arguing that Political Philosophies, whether "Liberal" or "Conservative" in name, have always had a foundation of sand in Principle and a habit of appealing to "pragmatism" in Practice to justify every new political excess or philosophical mutation.

That's precisely it. Thank you, OP, for saying it better than I would have.

Each proponent of every odd and ill-founded political perspective appeals to pragmatism, and that term has been used to defend awful excesses. Being one whose conservatism is not a philosophy unto itself but rather an outgrowth of my fundamental understanding of the role of Man within God's creation, I believe we have a better banner to rally under than that of pragmatism.

43 posted on 04/17/2007 6:08:31 AM PDT by Oberon (What does it take to make government shrink?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]


To: Oberon; durasell; L,TOWM
Each proponent of every odd and ill-founded political perspective appeals to pragmatism, and that term has been used to defend awful excesses. Being one whose conservatism is not a philosophy unto itself but rather an outgrowth of my fundamental understanding of the role of Man within God's creation, I believe we have a better banner to rally under than that of pragmatism.

Exactly. For you, as I understand your position, "Conservatism" must be objectively defined in terms of a "fundamental understanding of the role of Man within God's creation"... to make Conservatism subject to the whims of "Pragmatism" is to sacrifice, before the battle has even been joined, any concrete definition of Conservatism at all!

Oberon, I do not know if your understanding of "the role of Man within God's creation" is precisely the same as mine. I do not know if your personal beliefs favor the "Benevolent Watchmaker" Deist-God of Thomas Jefferson, or the more directly-involved "He holds All Destinies in His nail-scarred Hands" Jesus-God of Calvinism... and, according to the First Amendment, I don't need to know. That's your own business, although I'm happy to provide a Sermon upon request (bearing in mind always that I don't claim to be any sort of perfectly good Presbyterian; just a knowledgeable one).

But the very fact that you define Conservatism in terms of a "fundamental understanding of the role of Man within God's creation" tells me that you understand that Conservatism, in order to have any meaning AT ALL, must be objectively defined in terms which will stand the test of Time: God; Man; and Creation. What are our Rights under God? What are our Duties to our fellow Men? What are our Responsibilities in this beautiful Creation we have been given?

If Conservatism is subject to the whims of Pragmatism, it has (within the passage of time, of any one century or less) no real meaning at all.

I hope that "durasell" will understand your argument, and consider it thoughtfully.

It seemed clear to me that you never intended any Personal Attack in the first place.

best, OP

61 posted on 04/17/2007 8:26:44 AM PDT by OrthodoxPresbyterian (Please Ping or FReepMail me to be added to the Great Ron Paul Ping List)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson