~ firefly-dreaming a virtual home to learn (or teach!) alternative methods of solving problems we find facing us each day. By sharing ideas & knowledge on living with less stress, more joy & embracing tolerance & compassion we are working towards building a sustainable future for all living beings.
Tonight, I'd finally like to finish (for now, at any rate) the conversation I started last week when I posed the following:
If you had supreme authority over the nation for a day, what social policies would you want to enact and why? Feel free to be as idealistic or pragmatic as you prefer.
Now, whether you answered that in comments or not, I hope you've been kicking the thought around in your head since then.
I think a lot of arguments we have, whether on this site or others, stem, at least in part, from the conflict inherent between the perception of pragmatism versus idealism. There are the pragmatists who say we shouldn't rock the boat, so to speak. Let our politicians work things out. This is the best we can hope for, so let's just show our support and keep working to get better leaders in the future. The others are the idealists who are never satisfied with what we get, no matter how good it may be. They rock the boat.
But when you have to answer the question I posed, you can be neither. The idealists cannot achieve any of their goals without recognizing certain pragmatic choices. The pragmatists are put in a position of power, thus allowing them to act on their ideals or prove they are not interested in achieving anything.
I think there has been a bastardization of the meaning of these two concepts. Those arguing within the confines of these terms have lost perspective on what they mean, and so their constant dispute essentially holds no meaning. It is like arguing over whether you should have eggs or bacon for breakfast. Why not both?
Idealism is not a pie in the sky, "I want my pony now" attitude. It is a desire to see enacted those things which we believe will make this world a better place. Everyone has ideals. Without ideals-personal, social, and otherwise-we have nothing for which to strive. Idealism is thus about goals, not action.
Pragmatism is not about accepting things as they are assuming it is the best that can be expected under the circumstances. It is about finding the most effective way to accomplish one's goals. As such, it is based on the realities we perceive and how much control we believe we have over those realities. So pragmatism is about action, not goals.
Pragmatism and idealism work together, not against each other. Our ideals point the way toward our goals. They are the realization of our moral compass. We use that compass to ensure (as best as possible) that we take actions which do not lead us astray. We can choose to take actions which are pragmatic, thus acknowledging the realities we face, or we can choose less practical methods.
We will of course have differences of opinion as to which ideals to support and which methods are best, but false labels only serve to obscure the issues. So instead of mislabeling each other as idealists and pragmatists, let's try to understand that we all have similar ideals, and that our only real difference is what we perceive is the best way to achieve them.
A) Challenge the DK conventional wisdom.
B) Provide information which may lead to new ideas.
or
C) Push for action that is innovative or not just playing defense.
The point is not to agree (or disagree) with these diaries. It's about challenging ourselves to rethink our political philosophies, activities, and issue positions.
