I would a thousand other things to think about, but tonight there 's a question that I can out of my head. And I hope to exorcise it by writing. I do not think that I could submit it below with great clarity, but it 's the best that I can produce now, and I hope you can help me.
In my opinion a bit 'of time in this part you are experiencing the phenomenon of the disappearance of the facts in favor of opinion. Some recent examples are the controversy Cricket Veronesi the damage created by incinerators or the question of Mangano and Dell'Utri (but there would be billions of examples). I will not express an opinion about what I want to stress and 'on every issue now that there is no truth' that we can ascertain, but it 's all relative, all review.
Incinerators cause cancer? Guy says yes', the opposite Caio, who is right? About me is more 'nice,' cause there's no 'a scientific evidence.
Mr. Mangano has killed people, and 'was an active member of Cosa Nostra for years and it' been convicted of such offenses. It 'a mobster? It should be included among the persons recommended? This too is' questionable. For Dell'Utri and Berlusconi and 'a good person who has made some mistakes, but accepted the prison and did not make it light or muddy' Dell'Utri it 'Berlusconi, heroic behavior. The question asked is': "Who is right?" Instead of 'assessing the person Manganpo itself'.
Berlusconi is on trial along with Previti for buying a sentence. Berlusconi says that this is a political process, the fault of the red robes. The point ': it has or has not bought the sentence? But even here, and 'a matter of opinion, to take sides, if you believe in the condemnation process will qalunque Silvio' persecution against him. If you do not believe him and 'guilty strength. Has no more than 'the fact, but the deployment, sympathy or antipathy we feel toward the character.
Other field: Annozero Sgarbi said that Biagi has written a book on Romiti, praising Romiti, Labor says that Biagi has never written a book on Romiti. Who we right? Basically we are tempted to give it to Labor, if only for the soft tones with which arguments. But once again, and 'opinion, not the fact prevail. Biagi has written this book? You have to go to verify, but in the meantime the question remains for many people.
I remember one fellow students' studying books of rhetoric and psychology of debate who said that even if it is caught with his hands in dough should always deny, deny everything and then convince people that this is an opinion: I say that I did not, you say the contario, but in the end we have two different opinions, so no one can 'do say may be right. The fact disappears, there is no objective reason, sacrificed on the altar of subjectivity '.
In this way I mean, in addition to the failures of the Left in the years when he could dimostare its value, why the majority of Italians voted for Berlusconi. The fact that it is adequate or not to govern and 'matter of pure opinion. There are no objective data in the collective its inadequacy to govern given the conflict of interest. The point ': I see him as the devil or as a persecuted? The weight of the object of his conflict of interest disappears, leaving room for the fans. The fact that a convicted by final work on the laws, including those for which 'was condemned, and' a good or bad? It depends on who and '. Cuffaro and 'mafia or persecuted, unjustly convicted? If it asks you to a person or another change the bell, so in the end it does not matter who has committed a crime, but on which side people take sides, whether with or against him.
I believe that this 'is true of Cricket: it does not matter what' it says is true or false, helpful or not, count the fact that I is nice, I believe him, or think I'm obnoxious, and then spits out for me just nonsense. But objectively the problems mentioned are real or not? This too is' questionable.
Everything 'on, nobody can' tell the truth to have 'absolute in his hand, but I'd like to have somewhere fisso.Uccidere a person and' correct or not? Well if he does the rule for many and not always' wrong. Guy says yes', Dick says no. Whose 'opinion that I prefer?
I know, there 'a risk in my reasoning, if they come to the truth' absolute and incontrovertible, Giordano Bruno and Galileo would turn in his grave. But I wonder, will exist 'something absolutely right or absolutely wrong something? O 's all a matter of opinion, those who give a reason?
Fascism was evil? Not all of the state, and even right at this time we see a strong push historical revisionism (in this regard will remember 'forever Gabos image that comes into the classroom waving our history book, put the index at that time by Storace, and saying "Great Sabbatucci and right now even more 'big and even more' right!").
I find it a little 'comfort in faith, God remains that absolute that makes me a reference point. But from the point of view totally secular and philosophical, such as responding to my (perhaps misplaced) question?
0 comments:
Post a Comment