[Vision2020] Upon Reflection

[Art Deco]

We have had the same attitudes expressed here on V2020.

Instead of focus on the probable total/cumulative consequences of a decision, they only focus on a limited subset.

Perhaps there people may suffer from logical ignorance and/or value blindness.

Modus tollens:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modus_tollens

If a statement, say the application of an ethical principle, such as:  "the use of public highways should not be restricted except for reasons directly related to such highway usage" leads to consequences which are highly probable horrific, then the principle is wrong/false.

Although there is still controversies about the long range effects of the tar sands development, there is not much disagreement about some of the consequences that have already occurred.  To ignore these most probable consequences on life on this planet in favor of the alleged economic benefits is in my opinion value blindness.  Particularly since solutions in the field of alternate energy offer much less adverse impact and greater opportunity for economic growth and development in the long run.

w.



From: Tom Hansen 
Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2011 7:26 AM
To: Moscow Vision 2020 
Subject: [Vision2020] Upon Reflection


Of all the comments and statements made in regard to Moscow's megaload
madness, none of them upset me more than this one printed in the August
27, 2011 edition of the Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

--------------------------------------

"University of Idaho law student Al Baker and a group of his friends stood
on a corner opposite the protesters, holding signs supporting the
megaloads and oil sands project.

He said he didn't think the megaload was something worth protesting, given
the amount of work done to determine the feasibility of its travel plan.
He held a sign that said, 'I (heart) commerce.'

Fellow counterprotester and law student Reed Colten said the oil sands
project didn't concern him.

'Have you been to the gas station lately?' he asked. 'The more oil, the
better.'"

--------------------------------------

The rhetorical suggestions, hidden in Mr. Baker's and Mr. Colten's words,
are . . .

Why should we be concerned about the repercussions of our actions?

Why fret about tomorrow and the inherent problems our actions will produce
to which our children, and our children's children, will be forced to
respond?

Why not profit here and now?

The problem, Mr. Baker and Mr. Colten, is that this is the only planet we
have.  If we cannot actively (or, at minimum, passively) get along with
each other (where the option is simply to ignore one another), we must
genuinely get along with our environment (where the alternative may be
incomprehensible).

You may be willing to gamble the safety and survival of future generations
for a few pennies in your pocket.  I assure you, Al Baker and Reed Colten,
I AM NOT!

Now, if you will excuse me, I have a website to update and, I am certain,
there is a Tea Party caucus awaiting your attendance.

Seeya round town, Moscow.

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho










"The Pessimist complains about the wind, the Optimist expects it to change
and the Realist adjusts his sails."

- Author Unknown

=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20110827/435f9f01/attachment.html