Thursday, February 16, 2012

Should public policy be decided by Science Fiction?

"an armed society is a polite one"
That comes from science fiction writer Robert Heinlein's book Beyond This Horizon. One sub-theme of the book is the carrying and use of firearms. In the novel being armed is part of being a man; otherwise he wears a brassard and is considered weak and inferior. Women are allowed but not expected to be armed. Duels, either deadly or survivable, may easily occur when someone feels that they have been wronged or insulted, a custom that keeps order and politeness.

Is a work of science fiction one we should be modeling society upon?

14 comments:

  1. Name an unarmed society free of crime and violence, by either the people or the government.
    orlin sellers

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Orlin, none of us are claiming that we are going to attain to a society free of either crime or violence.

      What we do aspire to is a society that has less crime, less violent crime to the degree we do have crime, less domestic violence, less lethal domestic violence or other crimes of passion, and far fewer accidents, accidental discharges that wound or kill, far fewer successful suicides, etc.

      THAT is worth the effort of fewer - not zero, but fewer firearms.

      You try to make an extreme hypothetical case in order to invalidate the very much more legitimate and reasonable real case.

      Delete
    2. By the way, you unrealistic and extreme hypotheticall case is like the many other examples of the same from the gun nuts we see here. It is intellectually dishonest, not argued in good faith, a failure in critical thinking, and it makes you look both dishonest and stupid.

      We get that kind of failed and dishonest thinking a lot with proposals that selectively leave out key components in reasoning or argument, or which distort and misrepresent essential aspects of things.

      Don't do it.

      Delete
  2. That's not the same, Orlin. What we keep saying around here is that more guns are not the answer to minimizing crime and keeping a polite society. We DO NOT say that a complete absense of ALL guns is the answer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mikeb, if you are saying that more guns do not make less crime, you are implying that less guns means less crime and zero guns equal zero crimes. That is where your statement ends up in theory.
      orlin sellers

      Delete
    2. Orlin, who told you you could take MY theory and take it to an absurd extreme just to make it look silly?

      Delete
    3. Mikeb, your side keeps arguing that there's a linear relationship between the number of guns in a population and the number of gun crimes.. What, we can't draw the line to its logical endpoint? Of course, we've shown you populations with lots of guns and low crime--Vermont, for example--to demonstrate that the relationship isn't linear, but you ignore that.

      Delete
  3. UM, Orlin, Once again:

    Did you read the original post?

    Did you understand it?

    The saying an armed society is a polite one comes from a science fiction novel that glorifies gunfighting.

    I would also point you to the period of British history called the Border reivers, where people were all armed and brawls and murder were commonplace.

    To try to say that more guns will ead to a more peeaceful society is already something which has been disproven.

    Now, I'll bet you trot out John Lott, eh Orlin!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your title and comments are idiotic, blatantly stupid, and...well, I won't say dumber thsn a box of rocks, just not any smarter. Seriously, you think policies come from a science fiction book. The only ones thinking in science fiction terms are you anti-gum loonz.
      orlin sellers.

      Delete
  4. 1. You quoted from a novel in an earlier post. I suppose that it's all right, so long as the novel agrees with your position.

    2. The Internet is an unarmed society. Can we call people on-line polite?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quoting from a novel is fine to convey an idea more eloquently. That should not be confused with quoting fact, as distinct from fiction and unsupported opinion - as you have done here in the past.

      The internet is an unarmed society, it is not always polite, but to the extent that no one is shot, it is certanly more polite than the gun culture.

      Delete
    2. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me (in the meaning of injure).

      That goes doubly true for guns and bullets compared to snarky comments.

      Delete
    3. I know the difference between fact and fiction. I also know the difference between facts and values, something that you have yet to grasp.

      Sticks and stones? Dog Gone, are you ten? Grow up.

      Delete
  5. Isn't that the basis of Klingon society, too? Doesn't seem to tame them much. Just as valid a model to base your life on as "Beyond the Horizon," right?

    ReplyDelete