Logical consistency?

A couple of items highlight examples of inconsistency in logic and values. Neil Stevens starts on net neutrality and ends with

It simply makes no sense to foreclose nuclear plants as an option for power generation, while at the same time claiming concern about Carbon Dioxide emissions.

Dennis Prager deconstructs foul language and an irrational personal attack in wondering: Sorkin Called Sarah Palin an ‘Idiot’? . His point is that those who cannot discriminate, or refuse to discriminate, between acceptable behavior and unacceptable behavior have their own problems to resolve.

I return to the question: Does Sorkin really not see a difference between hunting an animal for food, torturing an animal, and murdering a human being — especially given the fact that he pays people to kill animals for his joy in eating them?

If he sees no difference, then it is he — not Sarah Palin — who best fits the description of her he gave in his column. The only other explanation would be that he so hates her that he will say anything, in order to insult her, even if he has to turn moral standards upside-down.

It does not seem that the higher order mental skills humans posses are considered very necessary by some. The do use language but reason, morality, ethics, and integrity seem to be rather far down the priority list.

Comments are closed.