Tall Midget wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
Let's not go overboard on the Bernstien stuff. I have always said that there is a place for his show at the station. However, it is not as the headliner giving the station its character.
I have a fuzzy rememberance from philosphy class that seems appropriate as an analogy for the Score:
thesis ->antithesis -> synthesis
North ->Bernstien -> ?
Who will be the next embodiment of the station's character? Unfortunately, if the analogy holds true, we will get some bland Connor Mc Night type as the next Score star. Consider that for a moment.
I agree to an extent. Bernstein is smart, by sports talk radio standards. But I have always held the belief that true intelligence is humble. It is unsure. It's actually the irony of the world we live in. The truly intelligent understand that we will always live in a world of gray. Anyone who lives in a world of black and white, to me, probably isn't as intelligent as they portray. Being "sure" of something, or most things, is the sign of someone who doesn't think deeply enough.
I see what you are saying in Bernstein's case, but question the broader validity of your statement. I would simply point out that there is a certain fetishization of complexity at work in many universities. What you are essentially describing is the ideological ambivalence of Cold War Liberalism (which remains the reigning orthodoxy in most universities today), which privileges "complex" analysis over epistemological certainty. I have long found this paradigm to be a ideological lever used to justify political quietism. Certainly we can see this is true from a historical perspective by tracing the evoloution of cold war intellectuals and their fealty to state power.
So, do you agree or disagree, in general?
And also let me clarify: there are many things we can be "sure" of, and we should be. For example, I am sure that if I drank arsenic, I would die. These are necessary survival beliefs. But philosophical beliefs, or thoughts, are not as absolute.
I will also say that absolutists, in general, are necessary. If they didn't exist, we would never get anything accomplished. But I don't necessarily consider them to be intelligent.
To summarize, Dan Bernstein is a necessary evil, but to come to the conclusion that he is a great intellect is incorrect, and that I'm sure of.
_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby