In the book «Science in a Free Society», Paul Feyerabend is concerned with the power challenges between specialists and the people the problems actually concern. He askes the above given question: How can a society that gives all traditions equal rights be realized? Do you think this challenge is smaller then when first asked by Feyerabend in 1978 in this book?
Traditions are one thing. Actions and behaviors may be very different. With difficulty Co-mingling many traditions can be exciting, enriching and afford growth to whole populations. But specific behaviors that might be centuries old of tradition may be antithetical to other cultural groups. Most cultural traditions need to compromise in order to live together in harmony and there has to be a consensus that the greater good will be found with greater diversity.
Societies that insist on homogeneity will become lost aliens in a global world and Their citizens will be unable to cope with those from anywhere else.
Traditions are one thing. Actions and behaviors may be very different. With difficulty Co-mingling many traditions can be exciting, enriching and afford growth to whole populations. But specific behaviors that might be centuries old of tradition may be antithetical to other cultural groups. Most cultural traditions need to compromise in order to live together in harmony and there has to be a consensus that the greater good will be found with greater diversity.
Societies that insist on homogeneity will become lost aliens in a global world and Their citizens will be unable to cope with those from anywhere else.
I'm quite sure large numbers of Canadians would claim that they do already. But you might wonder at the validity of that claim when "ordinary" white Canadians get worked up about blacks, Asians, native people, British, Italian, Portuguese, eastern European, Muslim or any other type of "Canadian". I can say this because I hold Canadian citizenship.
There's no real reason why it can't be done. This is so provided that none of the groups identified as deserving rights qua group holds views which violate the principle o equality. No Nazis then. And there's the rub. Push groups and they invariably hold grudges against others, and will slip into intolerance quite quickly.
So a well structured liberalism can do it. But practical matters require careful monitoring and swift attention. Any state errors should favour keeping individuals and groups on the straight and narrow.
Christopher NOCK
I do think the challenge is greater now because of the vast increase in media, information sources, and heterogeneity of sources. All people, including academics and scientists, are migrating to ever-more self-selected (and comfortable) information sources, while avoiding dissonant voices and alternative information. We are, thanks to this unanticipated consequence , becoming even more tribal within what should be a time of growing pluralism.
This does not forecast a near future of harmony, tolerance, acceptance of “the other”, or peaceful coexistence. The Information Age may become an opportunity lost.
I’m optimistic about the world morphing into a young global neighborhood due to technology over the last decades (ease of jet travel, internet, etc.). As for “equal rights,” my fifth edition will be out by the end of June:
https://www.academia.edu/37021128/Scientific_Proof_of_Our_Unalienable_Rights
We should not lament over today’s “challenges,” but find excitement in overcoming them:
https://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_is_the_world_getting_better_or_worse_a_look_at_the_numbers?utm_campaign=tedspread&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=tedcomshare#t-1093321
Mike
This is the optimism spawned by not residing in Trumpville.
I am growing weary and exhausted by the politics of the day and being mindful of 1924-1944 Germany.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Books