Awww...poor little pollster. I confused the hell out of him.
This guy called this afternoon, trying to gauge who would win the local election between Diane Black and JoAnn Graves. It was obvious the poll was geared toward Diane Black, since the two questions he asked me were about JoAnn Graves. The first question centered around an issue (I don't remember what) where she said she would vote for it and then abstained when it came time to actually do it. Would I vote for her since she didn't keep her word?
My answer was no - I would not vote for her if she did not keep her word.
The next topic focused on something I feel pretty strongly about but in the context of the poll, it really had no bearing: Ms. Graves has a pro-abortion stance and has voted several times in favor of it. Would I vote for her?
My answer was yes - I would vote for her if she kept her word.
Poor little confused pollster. I messed him all up. I did explain to him that I was basing my answers on each individual question, regardless of what the answer was before. Therefore, if she didn't keep her word in one question, I wouldn't vote for her. If she did keep her word, I would.
He didn't ask me any more questions. People really hate it when I get literal.
The thing is when it comes to politics, I get really frustrated. It seems politics is, many times, nothing more than a series of examples of the masses following the lead of one or the other parties. Everyone talks about needing a change in how the government works but nothing ever actually gets done. Most of the time, it seems voters don't even know who the candidates are and what they stand for and I will be the first to admit that I stand in that line when it comes to local politics.
Here's part of my stance:
- People depend entirely too much on the government. I can think for myself. I don't need governmental regulations to tell me to mind my apple pie from McDonald's because it's hot.
- I don't care what you do in the privacy of your own house. If it's between two consenting adults, go to it.
- People deserve the right to enter into a marriage, be they straight or gay. Relationships and love doesn't recognize such arbitrary boundaries.
- Pro choice does not automatically mean a person is not pro life. It means every woman deserves the right to decide what is right for her own body and mind.
- Leonard Peltier was framed. From what I understand, he wasn't even on the reservation the day those agents were killed.
Today was my one class day - Philosophy. It continues to be an interesting class. Today we concentrated on trying to figure out what the heck Plato was talking about, although his idea about the transmigration of souls was one of the easier things to comprehend. Basically, the transmigration of souls is simply the journey the soul makes from the intelligible world (the world of thought and form where we had complete knowledge of what things are) to this physical world (the world of opinion and appearance where we have forgotten all we know) and back again.
Sound vaguely familiar?
Plato also thought the soul had three parts (again, sound familiar?): Reason, Spirit and Appetite. The appetite is the basic needs: shelter, food, water, sex. The spirit encompasses the emotions while reason is the thinking, logical part of the soul. When the soul is not in balance - that is to say, when the appetite or spirit has control - then we do not serve the Good. However, when Reason is in control, governing actions based on the appetite or spirit, then the soul is in balance and able to serve the Good.
St. Paul apparently knew his Plato when he was spreading the word in the early days of Christianity. He talks about knowing an action is the right thing to do, not wanting to do it but doing it anyway or inversely, wanting to do something but restraining himself because it doesn't serve the good. It's believed to have been something Jesus said but it actually comes from Plato's idea of three parts of the soul and how they balance.
What I find interesting is how things don't just spring forth out of nothing but rather is built upon a foundation of something earlier.
Now if I could just find that website, "How to read Greek myth." I found a link to it a while back and lost it. According to it, the greek myths aren't something to be read literally. Each story is allegorical, if you know how to read the symbolism. Perhaps one of these days, I'll run across it again.
Page and graphics Copyright 2004 D. Firewolf
|