Thoughts On Polemic Argument

There is a big problem that I have with forums such as telephone phone-ins; comments on news stories and letters to the editor, and that is that most arguments I see made are seriously black-and-white. They also appear to be made by people with startlingly different views of 'reality'.

I certainly, and probably most other lay-people, don't really understand even part of some of the subjects being railed about.

People do however understand the bits of the argument that they fear will impact on them individually, and are usually led by a group of commentators that they favour; that they perceive to be speaking for them and whose arguments support their own world-view.  These can be tabloid or broadsheet newspapers, TV or radio commentators or they could be other sources of misinformation and speculation such as internet forums or blogs like this one.

The problem I have with many of these views is that they are simply that - just views. Taking this down to a basic level, a view could be what you see while standing on top of a hill looking out over a landscape. Your view of that landscape is essentially one-dimensional, as you only have one point of view, and the landscape is huge. Someone else on a hill a mile away, looking out over the same landscape will have a similar, but different point of view. Someone on the horizon looking back towards you will again be looking at the same landscape, but will have a completely different point of view. Finally there will be other people in the landscape, all of whom have their own point of view. None of these points of view are definitive, and as well as having a different perspective, they will also be tainted by the individuals' personal life experiences.

Where I have a huge issue with so much of this is that most of what people claim are rights or wrongs are really just judgement calls. Just different views of the same landscape.

For me the best arguments are made by those people who have taken the time to explore the landscape, who have stood with people on different hills and seen what they see and who have spent time with people within the landscape and experienced what they experience. Only then can a person really weigh up all the different points of view, and make a decision accordingly. The decision will still be limited, however it will be a combination of many views, and not just a single one.

Now I am not saying I always do this myself. Of course I don't. I do try though. As an aspiration, and as something to strive for as a society, I personally believe that it is is a good thing.

Where we will continually fail is when we refuse to acknowledge or understand other points of view, and work with them to find some kind of mutual understanding and agreement. This happens day-in and day-out in the media, encouraged by commentators eager to fill airtime and column-inches and to shift product.

Until enough people see that black-and-white argument; ignorant polemic and destructive ranting is not 'lively debate' and thus something to be encouraged, but is instead a stinking cloud which is stifling sensible, reasoned and productive discussion on a best way forward, we will continue to struggle to achieve anything significant, and probably end up with what we deserve.

On The Subject Of Heroes

By 'heroes' I don't mean the TV series of the same name; or professional people such as members of the fire brigade or lifeboatmen who rescue other unprofessional - and often downright stupid - people; or even elements of the ancient Greek mythological pantheon.

No, I mean Superheroes.

They are the Premier League of heroes who can leap continents in a single bound, or lift mountains with a single hand, often whilst making an 'I'm a little teapot' motif with their other hand and crossing one leg over the other like a highland dancer. Slightly camp, I feel, and with a rather strange affection for lycra and masks. All-in-all slightly strange behaviour and not necessarily the types of people you would want rescuing your child from a burning bus. Stick with the fire brigade, I reckon. You can trust them.

One thing all Superheores have in common though is a great publicist. They get to star in the best comics; get to save the most important cities and sometimes at the end of each adventure they even get the most beautiful women.

But what about those heroes who we don't hear about and those for whom this little piece is dedicated. These are the other heroes many in number and woefully unsung. They perform small acts of heroism every day, all over the world. They only leap small buildings; wear normal clothes and enjoy their end of story romances safely in the arms of a homely girl next door. Even so, where are their publicity people? Where are the artists employed to document their achievements in the latest graphic novel? How come they only get to save small market towns in the depths of the countryside?

The answer is simple. Nobody wants a Mediocrehero.

Binge Drinking And The Rise Of The Student.....

Thinking about binge-drinking recently, I suddenly connected the rise in Binge-Drinking amongst young people, and the rise in the number of University students over recent years.

Now I'm sure someone could do a study on this, however since it would probably be done at a university by a student - postgraduate, I suspect, but a student nontheless - the results would be somewhat dubious.

What we really need is for someone unrelated to either higher education or the drinks industry to perform this study. Give the job to a miner. Do we have any of those left...?

My suspicions, having spent time binge-drinking myself on the well-known binge-drinking hotspot that is Broad Street in Birmingham as well as at many, many other binge-drinking hotspots, is that many of the people doing the binge-drinking are in fact in higher education. These people are the decision makers and movers and shakers of the future. According to their representatives who pop up irritatingly frequently on TV they are "The Future of Britain".

(Incidentally, I was the future of Britain once, and hopefully - for a considerable time at least - I still am. But that's something to explore in another post).

Well, if you ARE the future of Britain, and if you DO want to be taken seriously by those of us older and considerably wiser than you, then please stop racking up huge debts, spend less money on booze, and get yourself a degree that is relevant, worthwhile and fit for purpose. I say this in the full understanding that it will make the ladies harder to pull for the gents, but that's the price of progress and a necessary sacrifice.

And while you're at it, you are the intellectual cream of Britain, so can you PLEASE stop using 'like' as every second word, innit.

The Alleviation Of Child Poverty In Trying Times

I am now getting right royally pee'd off with the extreme polarisation of any debate whatsoever on the radio. Specifically Radio 5 Live, and even more specifically, Nicky "I'd argue with my dead cat" Campbell. 

Today there were a whole raft of people ranting on about their own personal experience of one or maybe a couple of families on their estates (or more likely who they had read about in the Daily Mail) who are playing the benefit system. They then proceeded to extrapolate their flimsy uninformed argument onto the entire population of people on benefits. What tosh.

What they all failed to appreciate - including the lady who was working against child poverty, incidentally - is that the number of families claiming more than £26,000 a year in benefits will be extremely tiny indeed. (Jack Straw knew it, though. Well done Jack). I'd like to see some proper statistics on that. 

Any right-minded individual will agree that limiting benefits for large unemployed families in huge houses will be a bit of a nail in the alleviating-child-poverty coffin, at least for their particular army of feral children. 

However, to be fair I think that punishing these kids for the sins of their promiscuous child-farming parents is obviously not a good thing. I therefore suggest that if the benefit cap goes ahead, then as a country we need a counter-policy to lift all children out of child-poverty for ever. 

And what is this policy? Simple, really. Set a legally-binding, wholly-enforceable minimum threshold of £300 per week for pocket-money.

An Initial Thunk

So, what is a 'Thunk' exactly. Well it is simply a thought that has been thought of, or thunk.

So why do this? Not sure really, but perhaps simply a basic desire to write to make people laugh. To look back at my thunks in years to come when I can hardly remember who I am, perhaps. Or maybe a vain attempt at auto-ego-massaging in the faint hope that others may actually appreciate what I have to say.

But mainly I think it is to get the fingers moving over the keyboard and to collate and articulate ideas which I may at some point in the future use to better effect.

And what will I bang on about? Nothing in particular, and everything in particular. Much ranting and twisting of words will no doubt ensue. The full pantheon of mythical beasts will no doubt make an appearance (if not all together then certainly singly or in pairs), and I will probably have a go every now and then at bad drivers.

Finally, the odd recipe may appear, which I hope you will try to emulate.

So, sit back, enjoy, and feel free to comment profusely.