Quote:
|
Originally Posted by raveneye
Of course Crichton fails to mention that there are crazies everywhere, on both sides of the political spectrum. You could have given the same speech on any conservative movement you care to mention, because every movement has its lunatic fringe. But that doesn't invalidate the movement as a whole.
The movement as a whole should be judged on the basis of the best arguments in its favor, not the worst. That's the fundamental fallacy of Crichton's speech.
|
Perfect. I read the article, and was working through the thread trying to put words together that expressed how he's treating a minority fringe with his own fundamentalism. You did it for me.
I agree with the first bit regarding the challenges of truth vs. manipulation in this information age, and with evaluating causes and effects using as much data as possible, but the rest seemed like groundwork for another of his novels. Darken the greys to black so blanket generalizations and reactions seem justified. Good for the choir, but I thought that's what he was arguing against?
__________________
There are a vast number of people who are uninformed and heavily propagandized, but fundamentally decent. The propaganda that inundates them is effective when unchallenged, but much of it goes only skin deep. If they can be brought to raise questions and apply their decent instincts and basic intelligence, many people quickly escape the confines of the doctrinal system and are willing to do something to help others who are really suffering and oppressed." -Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, p. 195
|