Make This Web Page Your Home Page
|
|
Make This Web Page Your Home Page |
| A Rational
Advocate REASONED VIEWS ON ISSUES OF THE DAY |
|
THE BASIS OF RATIONALITY Information gathered in the present, combined with that
obtained and processed over past periods of time, is reprocessed by our
mind. If the past information is either not factual or erroneously
perceived, judgments reached will not have validity. To achieve validity,
reason based on factual information must be utilized as the basis for
making reevaluations of past judgments and evaluations of all new
judgments. This website's purpose is to advance this
rationale. |
|
REASONED
VIEWS ON TIMELY ISSUES |
| WORLD OF ECONOMICS | EDUCATION IN AMERICA | POLITICAL | WORLD & UNIVERSE | SOCIAL &
MORAL
|
|
FEATURED
ARTICLES |
|
In terms of
objective consideration it surely can be agreed that secular belief and
religious belief are both beliefs. If this is the case it would rationally
follow that religious belief should be given an accordant status as
secular belief in the application of government laws.
Relating this
to our public educations system, this would mean that educators have no
right to treat religious any different than non-religious expression. As
an example, in the recitation of the pledge of allegiance students have
the right to have the opportunity to speak the words "under God" should
they wish to do so. Of course, other students not wishing to speak
those wordsl have that right as well. This of course also would apply
to graduation ceremonies where both secular and religious related
presentations should be made.
Rather than
divide our citizenry by pitting secular vs religious, why not
bring them together by allowing all to participate in Government related
activities regardless of their personal beliefs. There is
nothing in ou nation's Constitution that prohibits this from happening.
Let's get on with it.
By Ben Cerruti We have been witnesses to
a continuing use of class warfare by those in government, abetted by the
media and an assortment of special interest groups and individuals. In
this essay we will consider the methods they use to establish the terms
relating to redistribution of income. Utilizing effective divisive tactics they initially obfuscate their
intentions by using the term "wealth" in place of "income" when proposing
material changes in the income tax code. Taxing income derived from
accumulated wealth does not alter that wealth. They next establish three
main category of classes; rich, middle class and poor. If one were to pay
close attention, he or she would find that they rather conveniently alter
the dividing lines to suit the subject for which they are advocates.
It should be apparent
that attempting to establish classes by simplistic definition is
ludicrous. Is a person earning $1,000,000 a year in his twenties as
rich as one earning the same amount in his or her sixties? The
person in their sixties may have had to spend many years working up from
under six figure annual income to reach this income level and the person
in their twenties may find that in later years his or her income may fall
to sub six figure level. A poor person at a young age may become
affluent with time and an affluent person may suffer financial reverses
that will throw him or her into what is presently considered the poor
class.
There are many other
factors, such as age, education, marital status, number of dependents,
physical capability, race, national prosperity, war or national emergency,
that affects the financial status of any person at any given time during
their lifetime.
It should be apparent the because of these factors, which for want of a better name we can call dynamic natural demographics, any fair and effective redistribution of income is impossible. The fact is that the use of class to define favors or penalties those in government may dispense is divisive and counter productive. It pits citizen against citizen and serves to only benefit those in government utilizing these tactics. It would rationally appear more productive for government if their actions would be directed towards supporting the movement of those at the lower end of the income scale, at any given time, up into higher levels of income. How obvious it should be that this result can be effected by more reliance on the overall growth of our national private sector wealth, wherein there is then more to share for every citizen; this rather than limiting growth by draining excessive wealth from the private sector that is then used in non-productive fashions. Those in government that control these actions that interfere with the manufacturing of private sector wealth, that benefit all in the private sector, do so in the guise of “fairness”. The disingenuous use of this word is more clearly understood when one understands that in this process a substantial portion of the private sector wealth taken by those in government is dispensed to those respective special interests to which favors are owed. This very fact should also dispel that mistaken feeling by some that Government can create private sector wealth better than the private sector itself. The obvious sometimes has to be explained. It is rather difficult to understand why people whom one would believe are well educated, especially those in the media, would not understand some of the following truths. People who accumulate excess income, unless they bury it or put it under their mattress, must place it back in circulation. They do this either by putting it in the bank, purchasing assets such as real estate, stocks and bonds, or by investing in assets and personnel for their own business. Just the fact that the excess income is in circulation allows for its use by the rest of the private sector to promote increased business, create jobs and overall increased financial wealth. If this excess income is confiscated through taxes it is not allowed to work to effect this increased private sector prosperity. Again, to explain the obvious, this counter productive action by those in government is only taken to benefit their own personal position and agenda since, in factual truth, it does not provide the beneficial advantage to those in the private sector, that it professes. It is necessary to understand that the government bureaucracy does not produce any revenue, it is supported solely by the taxes it collects. It is by its nature inefficient and self serving since those employed in it benefit personally in income and career longevity by its existence and growth. I hope there are those who read these words who still have hope and faith that there are among us leaders, new or old, that will arise to condemn the use of class warfare by those in government, and in the political arena, to serve their own rather than the interests of the citizens of this country which they disingenuously portray they do. Unfortunately that which has actually caused our present economic crisis is not even being given lip service by anyone. It is hoped that which is contained herein will help fill that void for the reader..
As every family knows, when it spends more than it earns it can only make up the difference by borrowing or increasing income. It is the same for the government except they also have the power to essentially print money. Let's look at how government appears to get away with running continuing deficits while any of us who did the same thing would eventually be forced into bankruptcy.
When the government spends more money than it receives, the Treasury Department has the power to borrow the difference by offering bonds for sale at market interest rates. Ready buyers of these bonds are those foreign countries who sell more of their products and services to U.S. entities then is purchased from them. The dollar difference (trade deficit) must eventually return to the U.S. and is predominantly used to buy this debt.
When the amount of funds required to satisfy the deficit exceed the amount of trade deficit dollars available to buy our bonds, the Federal Reserve Bank (FED) buys the bonds. The FED presently owns around 40% of the national debt and this means the government essentially owns this portion of its own debt. They buy these bonds by crediting the attendant purchase amount to the bank accounts of the dealers that sell them. Since banks are required to only maintain 10% of their deposits in reserve they can lend 10 times that amount. This 10 to 1 leverage is then further increased when money is moved by transactions to other banks.
Why should this be of concern? Because this created money is just like any other commodity and its purchasing power decreases when the amount of it available increases . When there is more supply than demand of a commodity the value of that commodity decreases.. Hence, the devaluation of the dollar and resultant eventual inflation. Although not yet present it will surely occur if and when the economy recovers.
Our present economic condition has been brewing for many years. Its beginning can be traced back to what ensued after it was agreed by 29 nations at the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944 that the U.S. would guarantee to sell gold at $35 an ounce effectively pegging the value of world currencies to the U.S. dollar. Subsequent continued deficit spending that exacerbated in the 1960's coupled with an increasing trade deficit resulted in marked devaluation of the dollar relative to gold. This led to the issuance of what were called “special drawing rights (sdr's)”, that were in essence iou's, to offset the difference between the market price of gold and $35 an oz.
In 1971 the continuing increased national debt and ensuing pressure from speculators and central banks forced President Nixon to abandon the gold standard. Thus the dollar became a fiat currency whose value was to float in relation to other world currencies. Without the restraint of the gold standard, deficit spending accelerated and rose from under $500 Billion in 1971 to $9 Trillion in 2008. During this period the FED continued to manipulate the money supply resulting in an inordinate increase in the price of homes followed by a marked decrease in these prices circa 1985 to 1998.. What then transpired brought us to our present economic predicament described as follows.. |
Letter to a Student
By Ben Cerruti
Dear xxxxx: Relating to your recent comments
concerning the effect of government directed tax cuts vs. spending on the
economy. I have material to present to you in this regard but I would like
to preface that with the following.
As I mentioned yesterday my daughter has gone through her first year
pursuing her MBA. She just finished a course in Macroeconomics and passed
on to me her textbook by N. Gregory Mankiw, a Professor of Economics at
Harvard. I told her that this textbook would never have been written if
the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 had never been passed since there would
have been no basis or need for it. My point being that government itself
has created most of the economic problems that it subsequently has
attempted to correct. In fact, most of the economists of the 20th Century
would have had to turn to other professions in order to survive.
I also believe that people are too ready to believe those academic
& government elitists just because they carry advanced degrees and
aura's of importance. In fact, economics in its essence is a simple
subject and can easily be related to ones own income and expenditures.
However, the reality is that the Federal Reserve System and what has
evolved from it is presently alive and kicking albeit to its possible own
demise. The following quotations from noted economists clearly provide
factual evidence that lower taxes are more likely to promote
increased GDP than increased government spending.
Milron Friedman - Along with Anna Schwartz, extensive empirical
research was done covering many decades and presented in their book
"Theory of the Consumption Function". "The central theme of the book is embarrassingly
obvious. People do not decide how much to spend on consumption each day or
week or year by how much they receive in income on that day or week or
year but on some longer term expectation of the amount that they will have
available to spend. Similarly, the flow of consumption services that
people enjoy during any day or week or year does not depend on how much
they spend that day or week or year but on the accumulated stock of goods
providing services (such as owned home, car, refrigerators,
etc)." Hence, the
assumption is that for income received, whatever form it takes, it cannot
be effective unless it is on a considered relatively permanent basis. This
stands to reason for businesses who are more likely to plan for growth of
their company by purchases of goods and hiring of people when they know
that they will be able to retain funds that they would otherwise have to
pay in taxes.
John Maynard Keynes - "Nor shall the argument seem strange, that
taxation would be so high as to defeat its object and that given
sufficient time to gather the fruits, a reduction of taxation will run a
better chance than an increase of balancing the budget. To take the
opposite view today is to resemble a manufacturer who, running at a loss,
decides to raise his price. And when his declining sales increase the
loss, wrapping himself in the rectitude of plain arithmetic, decides that
prudence requires him to raise the price still more. And who, when at last
his account is balanced when naught on both sides is still found
righteously declares that it would have been the act of a gamble to reduce
the price when you were already making a loss."
Professor Mankiw - "When John F. Kennedy became President.....in
1961, he brought to Washington some....bright young economists...to work
on his Council of Economic Advisors........One of the council's first
proposals to expand national income by reducing taxes. This eventually led
to a substantial cut in personal and corporate income taxes in
1964....When a reporter asked Kennedy why he advocated a tax cut, Kennedy
replied, 'To stimulate the economy. Don't you remember your Economics
101?' As...was predicted, the passage of the tax cut was followed by an
economic boom. Growth in real GDP was 5.3% in 1964 and 6.0% in 1965. The
unemployment rate fell from 5.7% in 1964 to 4.5% in 1965."
I am certain that at your stage of education the foregoing will
simply act to stimulate your interest in learning more about the subject
matter. At my stage in life I feel that I have been stimulated to learn so
much that I find those who have provided me the material from which to
learn are not that much smarter than I am - and - in some
respects may be considered to have been employed in a profession that has
possibly created more harm than good. |
|
|
|
How to Cure Health
Care
By Milton Friedman The United States
spends a mind-boggling percentage of its GDP on a health care system that
virtually everyone agrees is a disaster. Is there any way out of this
mess? There is-and Milton Friedman has found it.
Since the end of World War II, the provision of medical care in the United States and other advanced countries has displayed three major features: first, rapid advances in the science of medicine; second, large increases in spending, both in terms of inflation-adjusted dollars per person and the fraction of national income spent on medical care; and third, rising dissatisfaction with the delivery of medical care, on the part of both consumers of medical care and physicians and other suppliers of medical care. Rapid technological advances have occurred repeatedly since the Industrial Revolution-in agriculture, steam engines, railroads, telephones, electricity, automobiles, radio, television, and, most recently, computers and telecommunication. The other two features seem unique to medicine. It is true that spending initially increased after nonmedical technical advances, but the fraction of national income spent did not increase dramatically after the initial phase of widespread acceptance. On the contrary, technological development lowered cost, so that the fraction of national income spent on food, transportation, communication, and much more has gone down, releasing resources to produce new products or services. Similarly, there seems no counterpart in these other areas to the rising dissatisfaction with the delivery of medical care. These developments in medicine have been worldwide. By their very nature, scientific advances know no geographic boundaries. Data on spending are readily available for 29 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. In every one, medical spending has gone up significantly both in inflation-adjusted dollars per person and as a fraction of national income. In 1997, the United States spent 14 percent of gross domestic product on medical care, the highest of any OECD country. Germany was a distant second at 11 percent; Turkey was the lowest at 4 percent. A key difference between medical care and the other technological revolutions is the role of government. In other technological revolutions, the initiative, financing, production, and distribution were primarily private, though government sometimes played a supporting or regulatory role. In medical care, government has come to play a leading role in financing, producing, and delivering medical service. Direct government spending on health care exceeds 75 percent of total health spending for 15 OECD countries. The United States is next to the lowest of the 29 countries, at 46 percent. In addition, some governments indirectly subsidize medical care through favorable tax treatment. For the United States, such subsidization raises the fraction of health spending financed directly or indirectly by government to more than 50 percent. What are countries getting for the money they are spending on medical care? What is the relation between input and output? Spending on medical care provides a reasonably good measure of input, but, unfortunately, there is no remotely satisfactory objective measure of output. Ultimately, the purpose of this article is to examine the situation
in the United States. I have mentioned the data on the OECD countries
primarily to document the two (related?) respects in which the United
States is exceptional: we spend a higher percentage of national income on
medical care (and more per capita) than any other OECD country, and our
government finances a smaller fraction of that spending than all countries
except Korea.
By Thomas Sowell (TownHall.com) Those of us who are getting on
in years can remember a time when most people had no health insurance,
when we simply paid the doctors or the pharmacies and went on our way,
without giving it a second thought. I have especially painful memories of
having a hospital bill of $50 for the treatment of a baseball injury back
in 1949. You have no idea how big $50 was for me at that time. It was the
most money that I had ever paid for anything. But the bill got paid off, a
few dollars at a time, over a period of months. When and why did health
insurance, paid by third parties, become widespread in the American
economy? Like so many things that the government does, third-party health
insurance grew out of problems created by previous government
policies.....
|
WORLD
ISSUES click on titles to read complete essay Talk by Israeli scientist, Haim Harari (honoraria and bio), at a meeting of the
International Advisory Board of a large multinational corporation,
April, 2004.
As you know, I usually provide the scientific and
technological "entertainment" in our meetings, but, on this occasion, our
Chairman suggested that I present my own personal view on events in the
part of the world from which I come. I have never been and I will never be
a Government official and I have no privileged information. My perspective
is entirely based on what I see, on what I read and on the fact that my
family has lived in this region for almost 200 years. You may regard my
views as those of the proverbial taxi driver, which you are supposed to
question, when you visit a country....
This website has had posted a poll question relating to
Islamic beliefs and recently also posted an essay by 'A Rational Advocate'
whose content was related to that subject matter. The following is an
email dialog that developed from the initial comments made by a visitor
whom shall be called Ms X. The commentary provides an interesting
insight to the rationale of some non-Muslims relating to the subject
matter....
Madrassas and American Public
Schools
By Ben Cerruti Madrassas, Islamic Schools, and American Public Schools do
have a similarity. This similarity lies in the fact that they both
graduate students that have been indocrinated with a unilateral social
ideology. Some may argue that Madrassas deal with religion but, in
fact, the tenets of the Koran that are taught include much involving the
manner in which the society must function....
Will Al Qaeda Terrorism Go Away By Itself?
By Ben Cerruti Evidently there are some in the
Western World that think the answer to this question is yes. In the
U.S.A. we find among them many candidates vying to be the Democratic
candidate for President, acting as if we should have continued passively
after 9/11 and our military activity in Afghanistan, waiting for the next
attack by the terrorists on some target within our 50 states. In
Britain, where our President has visited recently, they attack the actions
of Tony Blair and the Coalition of the Willing in their effort to bring
democracy to Iraq. Their actions convey the feeling that they seem
to be on the side of the terrorists and thus to support the longevity of
terrorism.....
This is a World War
By Ben Cerruti Many pundits, politicians,
members of the press, and others in our society, maintain the view that
the armed conflicts existing around the globe are not necessarily
connected. However, this view does not hold up when the obvious facts
emerge to show that there is a common thread that exists to tie them
together. This thread is terrorism.....
By Ben Cerruti It is apparent that
there is confusion in the mind of many people. It lies in the view that
they think we have engaged in a war in Iraq that is winding up with the
U.S. as winners. The events that have transpired involving mid-east
terrorists over the last 20 plus years, culminating with the events on
9/11/2001, can only lead any rational person to the conclusion that our
war is against terrorism and we are far from winners of that war
yet......
TRUMAN WAS WRONG
By Ben Cerruti What with all the hoopla
over the North Koreans recent nuclear saber rattling one would think that
some mention would be made of what got us here. We hear nothing about the
Presidential decision that led to the permanent separation of Korea into
two states. Fifty two years ago a confrontation between President Truman
and General Douglas MacArthur, over far east policy leading to this
decision, dominated the news. It resulted in the removal of MacArthur from
his position as Commander of the U.N. armed forces then fighting the North
Koreans.....
ARE WE BEHOLDEN TO OIL PRODUCING NATIONS?
By Ben Cerruti A view appears to exist
that America is more dependent on the receipt of mideast oil than the
supplier is dependent on the revenue from its sale. As a result we find
contentious argument both inside and outside of government as to the need
and methods for making our economy less dependent on foreign
oil....
The
following burning question, I would think, should rationally enter the
minds of the greater majority of civilized people in this country and
world. Why would educated young Muslims take the lives of innocent victims
along with their own in the conduct of suicidal missions in support of a
cause? It would appear contrary to any religious belief, including that of
Islam.....
CAUSES OF ISLAMIC TERRORISM
By Ben Cerruti This morning I posed
myself the following questions. (1) Why can’t the causes behind the acts
of terrorism on our country dating back a decade be determined by a
rational analysis? (2) Why can’t we wean ourselves away from dependence on
the resources of the region of the world that threatens
us?......
Why do so many seemingly good
people with a liberal bent become pent up with rage when they read or hear
the word "Christian" in a conservative context. In their diatribe
they invariably relate the word to their villainous foe "the religious
right", or as it is sometimes called, "the Christian right".
Regardless of the possible merits to be found in the presented material,
they lose rationality when they see the word "Christian" even though it
may only be referencing the most positive moral virtues and
perspective.....
State’s Rights – What happened to them?
By Ben Cerruti The creator’s of our
Constitution were so concerned that the Federal Government would usurp the
powers of State Government that they included provisions to lessen that
possibility. However, time has taken its toll on these provisions
and the politics they had hoped to minimize has reared its ugly head in
the Supreme Court to further erode the powers of State
Government.....
By Ben Cerruti In general elections
should a person vote for a candidate or his party affiliation? There are
various reasonable arguments that can be proposed to justify voting in
either manner. Perhaps it would be well to look at the motivation for
voting.......
THE UNREASONABLE POWER OF
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE UNIONS By Ben Cerruti President Bush had
threatened a veto if the Homeland Security Act did not include provisions
that would allow the new department flexibility in dealing with
employees. Such provisions to include the right to waive collective
bargaining rules and to eliminate the lengthy and difficult procedures to
move or terminate federal employees now existing in federal law.
With difficulty, and some compromise with members of Congress, the Act was
finally enacted with provisions that somewhat minimzed the ability for
public employee unions to adversely affect homeland
security........
A visitor to this web
site recently had comments to make about the essay “Are You Conservative
or Liberal?” written by “A Rational Advocate“. As a result, an interesting
dialog developed that should be of possible interest to other visitors and
it follows.....
ARE YOU LIBERAL OR CONSERVATIVE?
By Ben Cerruti The answer to this
question, as used in political connotation, requires an understanding of
the respective terms. This process involves the semantics of their use in
discourse. It stands to reason that a mutual understanding of the words
and terms when utilized in discussions is required for communication
between the parties involved to convey true meaning to the
discourse.......
REDISTRIBUTION OF INCOME
By Ben Cerruti We
have been witness to a continuing use of class warfare by those in
government, abetted by the media and an assortment of special interest
groups and individuals. In this essay we will consider the methods
they use to establish definitions as it relates to the redistribution of
income......
TRUE CAMPAIGN FINANCING REFORM
By Ben Cerruti What
are the reasons for contributors to provide money to candidates for public
office? Common sense tells us that they are as
follows:
1. Ideological, meaning to promote the ideals in which the contributor believes. 2. Self-seeking, meaning to gain from the candidate commitment to actions that will be economically beneficial to the contributor..... THE CASE FOR TERM LIMITS
By Ben Cerruti There
are those that claim that elections are the most effective method of
holding legislators accountable for their actions. In a truly
democratic system this might be possible but unfortunately ours is not
such a system as experience tells us....
MISUSING
THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
By Ben Cerruti There
is a great misuse of meanings of certain words and phrases by many in our
society, with the greatest abusers being many media and political persona
and social opportunists (self-serving individuals and groups). It is
especially disingenuous when this practice takes place in the
categorization of people for the purpose of pitting one category against
the other....
SOCIAL
ISSUES click on titles to read complete essay BO's speech at Notre
Dame completely ignored the role of the Doctor in abortions, as did Notre
Dame's administration
BO's speech to
the 2009 Notre Dame graduating class amplified the sounds of those on both
the pro-life and pro-choice sides of the abortion issue. No one seems to
view this issue as having what can be viewed as another position based on
who are those who are committing the abortions. The Doctor performing the
act is getting away with what some would call murder. If reason was used
it could be held that the expectant mother is asking someone to commit
this act and the very acceptance of a Doctor to do so could be considered
an illegal act under the Constitution. Hence if it is the Doctor
who is committing an illegal act that should be prosecutable.
The following article I wrote a few years ago
addresses the personal responsibility issue and the fact that
the expectant mother does have a choice but that it does not include
a third person to commit the act. It would not mean that a
Doctor should not be able to administer to her after she has opted to
find a way to induce the abortion herself, including possibly taking a
pill prescribed by a Doctor. The point being morally and ethically
shouldn't she be responsible for performing the physical action of
inducing the abortion? Having to make such a decision in which she is
physically initiating the act makes it more likely that she would more
seriously examine her options. Those being to keep the child or to
offer it up for adoption. Being more personally responsible
could cause those thinking of practicing unprotected sex to think
twice about it and possibly consider a degree of abstinence. Of greater
possible importance would be that a third person, the
Doctor, would not be taking a life and violating moral and ethical
tenets..
In regard to
BO's position on stem cell research, he has authorized use of our tax
dollars similar to those provided for foreign abortion clinics, to
fund embryonic stem cell research. The government should not be in the
business of funding these programs on which our society is
divided. However, the private sector is free to spend their research
dollars as they wish. In fact, positive results of adult stem cell
research has recently shown that that embryo's need not be destroyed at
all.
EUTHANASIA AND ABORTION By Ben Cerruti Headlines a few years ago
were cognizant U.S. District Judge's confirmation of the Oregon
voter-approved law allowing doctors to assist in the death of terminally
ill patients. I wonder if this Judge was aware of the Hippocratic Oath.
The Hippocratic Oath, of course, is what historically was taken by those
entering the medical profession upon graduation from medical
school........
A visitor to this web
site recently had comments to make about the essay "Homosexuality Is Not Normal" written by “A
Rational Advocate“. As a result, an interesting dialog developed that
should be of possible interest to other visitors and it
follows...
Homosexuality Is Not Normal
By Ben Cerruti Why do homosexual couples who wish to establish a union
between themselves insist on having the government allow them to be
endowed with the same marriage title provided to heterosexual couples? Why
are they not satisfied with being provided the same legal provisions in
the form of a title called "civil union"? A single answer to both
questions is obvious. They want society to consider their relationship
normal. The reason the government should not concede to their demands is
also obvious. Their relationship is not normal because man and woman were
put on this earth with complementary sex organs meant to procreate the
species....
Another visitor to this website recently had comments to
make about the essay "Homosexuality Is Not
Normal" written by “A Rational Advocate“. As a result, the
following dialog developed between the visitor, who is given the name Mr.
H, and A Rational Advocate (ARA)....
WHY GO TO MARS
By Ben Cerruti The Space program had
become another humdrum government program to the average American before
the tragic loss of Columbia. It took that event to awaken us to think
about this program and the reason for its existence at this point in
time......
LEGALLY HACKING YOUR COMPUTER
FILES
By Ben Cerruti The 4th Constitutional
Amendment states:
"The right of the
people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,against
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants
shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation,
and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or
things to be seized" - Recently Representative Howard Berman, Democrat
from California, introduced HR5211,a bill to indemnify holders of
copyrights on files who use technological means to enter one's Computer
and disable the use of such files.......
ALTRUISM IS AN ACT NOT AN INNATE
VIRTUE
By Ben Cerruti Altruism is defined as
regard for and concern for the welfare of others. An Altruist is defined
as one who adheres to the practice of Altruism. A problem exists in our
society in the interpretation of actions versus intentions. The
premise I take here is that a person cannot perform an altruistic act that
does not fulfill a personal intent to commit it. Thus the definition of
Altruism contradicts itself.
By Ben Cerruti Published in 1932, a novel by Aldous Huxley, entitled “A Brave New
World”, described a fantasized society of the far future which has, as
time progresses, becomes less a fantasy and more a possibility. This
society controlled by an authoritarian centralized government practices
mass breeding of humans in laboratories, called hatcheries, replacing
normal maternal reproduction......
By Ben Cerruti Love
is a most misused word. Saying things like “I Love Cookies” or
“I Love It” or “I Love to Ski”, when the word that should be used is
“like”, is innocent enough....However, the word love also has another
common misuse, with which we are also all familiar, but this misuse
sometimes gives the user of the term a lot of
grief....
Topic content, other than that from linked websites, may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the permission of A Rational Advocate
|
|
