Liberal Inability To Abstract
A Liberal Inability To Abstract underlies common liberal beliefs, particularly among those who have difficulties with certain abstractions.
Liberals like Michael Moore can be heard making arguments apparently designed to appeal to people who have difficulties grasping the abstract flaws. Moore or other liberals may be fully aware of the flaw in an argument, but might make the argument anyway in the hope of appealing to dimwitted liberals.
Here is a list of flawed liberal beliefs based on the increasingly levels of abstraction needed to debunk them:
|Abstraction Required |
|Issue||Abstraction Needed To See Truth|
|1||Socialism||need to recognize the invisible hand: unseen market forces work best|
|1||social vices||harm can be caused without materialism by destroying the mind, and that "victimless" crimes do have victims|
|2||liberal censorship||disliking an idea is not a justification for censoring it|
|2||Health Care||unseen free market innovates the most in developing new treatments|
|3||Gun control||unseen deterrence: more guns mean less crime|
|3||Taxes||Laffer curve: more taxes mean less government revenue|
|4||Hell||unseen for some now does not imply that it will not exist for them later|
|5||feminism||unseen value of some division of labor and activities by gender, rather than mindless equality|
|5||radiometric dating||unseen logical circularity in assuming constant decay rates in order to claim an Old Earth|
|6||marriage||unseen harm in legitimizing alternative arrangements as traditional marriage|
|7||opportunity cost||the unseen cost in forgone opportunities, such as the money that could be made in the time wasted watching television|
When discussing one of the above issues with a liberal, first consider whether the liberal is capable of understanding the abstraction. If not, then your main challenge may be in explaining the abstraction as clearly as possible.
When a liberal denies the existence of something that is unseen, it can be helpful to inquire if it is possible that the five senses are limited and cannot experience all that exists. Once he admits the truth of that statement, then he can begin the process of abstraction to learn the truth and see the flaws in many liberal arguments designed for those who are unwilling or unable to abstract.
Is there any logical difficulty to experiencing Hell once the five senses stop working?