[TKDietz]

I don't know enough about Karl Popper's writings to argue about them. I've never read any of his books. I've only read about him. Some describe him as right wing, someone Republicans and libertarians would find appealing. The Open Society Institute is George Soros' thing. I don't really know much about what they do either or how much they adhere to Karl Popper's philosophies.

[rogerv]

I can't really answer those questions for you. My point is to use Popper as a starting point for thinking about what is in need of attention in our own society. I support some of what Soros is trying to do, but again, I didn't come here to defend Soros. He's a smart guy--he can defend himself! My point in this thread is to talk about how we can be more rational in our approach to institutional reform, and wean ourselves from magic thinking. People who would substitute faith healing for going to a doctor, ought to be persuaded to keep praying, but see the doctor anyway. We have lots of evidence that in the old days when doctors had little to offer besides sympathy that many children routinely died from diseases that we can effectively prevent or cure now. I think some of the refusal to believe we are doing environmental damage is based on magical thinking--the idea that God would not let us destroy the planet because there is nothing about it in the Bible. I can respect someone who takes the Bible seriously, but cannot respect this as a reason to ignore the evidence that human actions have changed important ecological cycles, and are affecting climate. I have said before, and I repeat here--I don't have all the answers. I may not even be asking the right questions. But I do think we should be much more demanding than we are about what will count as an acceptable answer. And I think we should be more disciplined in the way we search for and evaluate possible answers.