Craig Minns is like the batch of people who recently said that they were leaving OLO because of the "right wing" posters; the "rightist nutters"; the "hard right" and so on. What they really meant was that conservatives were not bowing to their (the leftists') 'moral superiority' and 'knowledge', nor were the conservatives here frightened off by the bullying and name calling they practised - the constant use of words like 'racist', 'hater', 'homophobe' etc. In other words, the kiddies were not getting their own way as they were used to; suddenly, they found themselves among people different from themselves with different life experiences and different values. What a cheek!

Minns thought 'ignorant old idiots' would go to water at the mention of some relatively obscure philosopher, who has many critics, and who is no more qualified to make up theories than anyone else.

When Minns intimated that some of us were keeping more people from expressing their opinions on OLO, he meant more people like him, who think that they are right, and people with contrary opinions are wrong. The left has control of schools, universities and the media. The last couple of generations of people put through the system think that there are no opinions other than theirs. They spit on history, traditional, morals and experience. They cannot be allowed to go unchallenged.

Dear Craig,

They do remind one of a bunch of snotty nosed brats at the back of the class don't they. The ones who always got so enraged when another kid showed the slightest bit of intelligence.

This following refrains are certainly indicative of the fragile nature of their self esteem;

“not bowing to their (the leftists') 'moral superiority' and 'knowledge'...”

“Why don't you just say "miserable white old buggers", Craig Minns, and proudly display your racist contempt for old white people?”

“You are a left wing troll, 'doing' degrees (which you might or might not finish), and you believe that makes you superior to the rubes.”

Don't they just scream a toxic inferiority complex.

Expressing a desire for more civilised discussion on OLO is a worth sentiment since it featured just that virtue once. Now the rabid right have crawled out from their kennels to snap at heels and gnash their fangs. They are incapable of biting with any substance but the shear cacophony of their yelping does get tiresome.

This line from Cannery Row rings very true;

“...men in fear and hunger destroy their stomachs in the fight to secure certain food, where men hungering for love destroy everything lovable about them.... In the world ruled by tigers with ulcers, rutted by strictured bulls, scavenged by blind jackals.... What can it profit a man to gain the whole world and to come to his property with a gastric ulcer, a blown prostate, and bifocals?”

Steele, I'm not proud of bringing that out in people, I actually sympathise with their plaint in some ways. It's tough to feel that others aren't taking you seriously because of some perceived lack in your qualifications. What I hope is that the hurt feelings will subside and they will think back on the course of events and reflect a little with the wisdom of hindsight.

mac, I'm finding it quite a struggle at times, but it's also been a great chance to remind myself just how bloody bright the kids are and how much we're going to need every bit of that in the coming years. I agree with you that economics can be pretty ideologically driven, but that is gradually being reduced, as work in behavioural econ advances. Ideology is a form of heuristic that allows people to ignore the detailed mechanics of a proposed solution to a problem; they can focus instead on the "winners" and "losers" in simplified terms and barrack for "their side". Great for hack journalists and politicians, not so great for those who have to respond to problems in meaningful ways. Philosophy is vital, in my view, because it teaches how to think about thinking, which is not taught especially well in other disciplines.

ttbn, try to settle down mate. If you don't want to be made to feel like a twit, don't act like one! If you took the time to read the stuff I wrote you'd be able to comment on it more usefully. For example, in the post at the top of page 5 of this thread I mention my age.

Kohlberg was a psychologist, not a philosopher except to the extent that any curious person must be. As I said to mac, don't take my word for his findings, do some research and make up your own mind.

LEGO, why didn't I say "old white men"? You might find the following link useful, it's a previous article I wrote

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=18456

Talk about undergraduate type peeing in each others pockets. Steele & Craig, you remind me of the undergraduate twits indulging in anti Vietnam moratorium marches, when I went back to Sydney uni to finish my BSc. I'd had time to grow up, serving as a fighter pilot in the navy, & found the wet behind the ears arts & humanities students extremely disgusting.

All to many of them never did manage to grow up, which is where most of our problems come from today. A few years service in Afghanistan was what they needed to make adults of them.

Sadly you still display that behaviour indicating the same growing up experience would do you the world of good.

Of course I would not really wish such a pair of pseudo people on the men currently serving our country.

Hasbeen,

I can't see the military wanting fairies like those two.

Dear Hasbeen,

You must be a lousy poker player mate. As soon as you feel pressured you dive right for the 'I was a navy pilot' line. It is your bolt hole albeit a repetitious one.

The fact that you have flagged it with such regularity so very many times on this forum is plainly indicative of the fact your ability to form coherent and rational responses is rather tested.

Perhaps you might like to wean yourself off it for a while and put some thought into your posts. It would be a welcome change and one I'm sure would keep the ulcers at bay.

Dear Craig,

“I can't see the military wanting fairies like those two.”

Nip, yelp, snarl.

He is a caricature isn't he.