So Close, Yet So Far…

DW Dalrymple

DW is an ex-mountaineer now residing in the Palmetto State, a former political hack/public servant, aspiring beach bum and alleged rock-n-roll savant. Forever a student of the School of Life. You can find him on Twitter @BIG_DWD

Related Post Roulette

27 Responses

  1. JoeSal says:

    Greater good, that’s some funny stuff right there.Report

    • Philip H in reply to JoeSal says:

      you really don’t believe in higher callings or public service do you?Report

      • JoeSal in reply to Philip H says:

        I don’t believe anyone has social objectivity calibrated correctly.Report

        • Philip H in reply to JoeSal says:

          not sure how social objectivity calibration has anything to do with public service . . . .Report

        • DW Dalrymple in reply to JoeSal says:

          Greater good refers to the fact that you are doing something that most likely will not benefit you but many people, a community or even the human race depending on what the subject matter is. A social objective is a statement that details a specific desired outcome of a project that is related to the interaction of the individuals, groups, and institutions within a society. But you already know that. When you have 2 sides as far apart as we do in Washington, it’s true that their calibration is off. They are focusing on extreme party lines and not the greater good, which is out there beyond those party lines.

          Thanks for the input.Report

          • JoeSal in reply to DW Dalrymple says:

            In order to know a social objectivity of what is good, social truth has to be resolved.

            I contest that it is resolved at all, and hold those that do consider it resolved as questionable.

            That doesn’t have to involve a party, or Washington, it has to do with truth.Report

            • DW Dalrymple in reply to JoeSal says:

              As long as polarized politicians in power, distinct groups, are perceiving their ideals to “be so” the social truth will never come to a consensus or a resolution. The only truth that is absolute is universal truth. A truth not subject to interpretation by any group.Report

              • JoeSal in reply to DW Dalrymple says:

                If social truth cannot be resolved, then why do people assume there is social objectivity? This is the error in the ‘greater good’, unless the social truth is resolved, it is only a illusion.Report

              • DW Dalrymple in reply to JoeSal says:

                Social objectivity is a statement of a specific goal by a group that believes its own version of social truth. This group is focused on advancing their goals and truths. Not focusing on the greater good, which by definition may not necessarily directly benefit the group focused on advancing subject matter that satisfies their own needs and beliefs. The greater good can be a compromise between 2 groups that are aligned with their social truths and objectives. Weighing both sides to benefit a larger group.Report

              • JoeSal in reply to DW Dalrymple says:

                Social objectivity sb based on social truth, in the same way empirical objectivity is based on empirical truth.

                So let me ask, is empirical truth ever compromised on?

                Then why should social truth be? Maybe because it isn’t truth at all, it’s just a matter of preference.

                There is no universal social objectivity.

                The greater good is just a negotiation of preferences.Report

              • DW Dalrymple in reply to JoeSal says:

                Ding-ding-ding….we have a winner!Report

              • Philip H in reply to DW Dalrymple says:

                sure the greater good is a negotiation, never said it wasn’t. Problem is not all players are negotiating from equal positions, and many not in good faith. Letting that just run on gets us as a society into trouble repeatedly, and thus some sort of referee is needed. We choose government as the referee.Report

          • Philip H in reply to DW Dalrymple says:

            “They” are focused on maintaining and expanding personal power.

            “We” who are the civil servants stuck in the morass, are still very much focused on that greater good, and unlike @JoeSal most of us do in fact agree on what those goods are and should be. I don’t need political parties to agree that clean water is good in order to work for a government agency that makes sure the water is, in fact, clean. Said cleanliness is a greater good, because until the aarly 1970’s, we as humans thought we could whatever we wanted to water. We were wrong, and we created the social truth – backed by a lot of empirical science – that clean water needed to be protected and enhanced. Government plays the lead role in that social objective because of economies of scale and because markets don’t actually value natural resources.Report

            • JoeSal in reply to Philip H says:

              Exhibit -A- of the social truth that the government is the supreme tool to fix problems

              Exhibit -B- the social truth of markets and resources is not well understood

              Thanks, Philip, you kind of make my case for me.

              Now back to our last negotiation of preferences:

              -You can have as big a State as you want, as long as there are no statists in it.

              -You can have as much socialism as you want, as long as there are no socialists in it.

              -You can have as much standing army as you want as long as it doesn’t have arms or force in it.Report

              • Philip H in reply to JoeSal says:

                government is A tool to fix problems when no other tool has fixed them. The fact that we as a society and an economy choose to allow profit to trump value – meaning in this case allowing water (an essential biological element for life) to be degraded for short term monetary gain and greed instead of protecting it for long term use – means the other tools have failed.

                As to your other “negotiation” reference – I’m a plain language guy. Your slogans are interesting but devoid of actual meaning. people have to do things to make all those constructs work.Report

              • JoeSal in reply to Philip H says:

                Exhibit -C- the social truth of we as a society and an economy choose to allow profit to trump value

                Ha, as if on cue.Report

              • Philip H in reply to JoeSal says:

                I am not wrong am I? Because that”s what we do.Report

              • JoeSal in reply to JoeSal says:

                There always have to be these little bits of social objectivity nuggets claimed and clamored onto.

                You ever wonder why?Report

              • Philip H in reply to JoeSal says:

                Because Humans as creatures are evolved biologically to be communicative and social, and so to keep from killing off people we actually depend on for survival?

                Ever wonder why when you are asked a straightforward question you choose to always dissemble into social objectivity obfuscation?Report

              • JoeSal in reply to Philip H says:

                These aren’t straight forward questions, they are about truth versus religion.Report

              • Damon in reply to Philip H says:

                “government is A tool to fix problems when no other tool has fixed them.”

                Indeed, because society hasn’t figured out to fix the “youtube autoplay” disaster, we for sure need a law!Report

  2. Chuck says:

    Well said my friend and I’m qualified to say that because David and served on council together for several years and accomplished some good things for the city. If you truly want to know who the real deal is you just read his article.Report

  3. Mark says:

    My personal vision of the American dream has changed over time. When I was 16, I dreamt of going to California and becoming a surfer; I wanted to go to Surf City because it is two to one. I was living in a moderate sized Midwest town where 40% of workers were in UAW jobs. College made me think that I was sophisticated and I sensed that my hometown had peaked in some way, and I moved to the East Coast. I lived there for ten years. Most people I met in East Coast cities were non-natives. I met few natives of NYC, Boston, or Atlanta in my circles. The East Coast was fun and eye-opening in many ways, but I always felt like a stranger, like you feel as an incoming freshman the first day of high school. I couldn’t go to my hometown; the UAW plant was overseas, and the population was aging, shrinking, getting poorer. I did move West and had a good life. I am considering a move to a Sunbelt retirement town, but I feel too vigorous.
    My American dream? I still haven’t found what I’m looking for.Report

  4. DW Dalrymple says:

    Everyone has their own definition of that dream Mark. You’ll find yours someday. Keep on keepin on…Report

  5. atomickristin says:

    I had missed this the first time, so glad I got a chance to read it.

    My husband ran for Congress in 2000 (as a Libertarian, he didn’t intend to win) and then spent several years on the Town Council, and he often says that no matter what the future holds, he feels like we did our part to influence events as best we could. 🙂Report