> When it comes to politics, his opinions are poorly-thought-out, self-serving, and generally worthless.
As are 99.999% of everybody's.
Except what you're saying (ie your judgement about PG's 'poor' political thinking) is self-referentially meaningless unless you consider yourself a "native expert" in political thinking.
Why are we not to take and measure and discuss ideas a la carte?
What value is there in group-classifying the 'wrongthinkers', except to save people the exhaustion and torture of learning new and diverse ideas and for thinking for themselves?
As are 99.999% of everybody's.
Except what you're saying (ie your judgement about PG's 'poor' political thinking) is self-referentially meaningless unless you consider yourself a "native expert" in political thinking.
Why are we not to take and measure and discuss ideas a la carte?
What value is there in group-classifying the 'wrongthinkers', except to save people the exhaustion and torture of learning new and diverse ideas and for thinking for themselves?