Since we are trying to get your votes, all of us political candidates engage (quite reasonably) in self-promotion. We note our good qualities, suggest our opponents are inferior in those respects, etc.
So, please, when I say things like "as a professional philosopher, I am a more skilled and trained general thinker than most others", don't react simply by thinking I'm a pompous ass. Rather, I simply ask that you consider whether or not it is true. For example, if you like, investigate whether or not I am a professional philosopher. Better, read a lot of my blog entries and check out firsthand my qualities as a thinker. And then also, of course, if you conclude that I am a highly skilled and trained general thinker - consider whether or not that is as important as I claim it is.
For comparison, when McCain notes over and over again his much greater political experience than Obama, no one's reaction is "what a pompous ass". Instead, people (quite rightly) consider just how much greater McCain's political experience is, and, to the extent that it is, how much that matters in and of itself. (To illustrate - if you ask me - when Obama notes that what is ultimately important is good judgment, and experience is simply one among many ways to acquire good judgment, he is spot on.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
The "what a pompous ass" argument often seems like an anti-intellectual response rather than an anti-self-promotion response. Apart from whether American voters ought to value a trained thinker as president, do you think they do?
Thanks for the comment.
It would not seem that a high proportion of American voters as a matter of fact value a trained thinker as president. I hope that my campaign contributes (at least marginally) to political progress by, in part, appealing to what voters ought to value, and not what they as a matter of fact value.
Post a Comment