Tags
Admit it: every once in a while you think it…
David Harsanyi: “Bring Back Dueling”
20 Saturday Feb 2016
Posted in honor code, honor in contempory media
Honor Ethics
%d bloggers like this:
20 Saturday Feb 2016
Posted in honor code, honor in contempory media
Tags
Admit it: every once in a while you think it…
Ryan Rhodes said:
As sympathetic as I am to Harsanyi’s suggestion, perhaps the most notable part is the discussion of the extensive codes binding the duelists. For it seems to me that a large part of the problem with political debates, especially in this cycle, is the lack of rules involved. Sure, there ARE rules–but they tend to be of the “you have X long to answer a question, and if someone attacks you, you have Y long to respond to them”. But what if there were rules like: “If you do not actually address the question asked, the moderator will not let you off the hook until you do so?” Or, “If you engage in an obvious logical fallacy, the moderators will call you out on it until you give a legitimate answer?” Or even: “If you state something that is known to be false, you will be corrected and called upon to try again”? In one sense it’s hard to see how such a thing would be feasible, but the alternative seems to be candidates who have little incentive not to “win” by lies, vulgarity and sophistry provided they can sound just compelling enough that viewers gravitate toward them. If nothing else, when one candidate violates what rules there are by talking over someone else who has the floor, could we not simply kill his microphone? Perhaps a certain kind of voter would interpret such steps as the “evil media” trying to interfere with the process. But for voters who care about legitimate civil discourse, might they serve as a remedy to the sad state of our public debates?
LikeLike