Read the following article. What are the thorny issues for Republican candidates? Why? What would Plato have to say about the respective candidates? Are these worthy items for debate or should the focus be on something else?
12 Comments
Charles B
9/6/2011 02:04:51 pm
The Republican candidates are facing major issues concerning scientific theories (evolution vs. intelligent design), and also with global warming. Many people do accept the science behind global warming, but 6 out of 7 Republican candidates are against evolution? This seems wrong to me. Of course, there are "gaps" to this theory, gaps Darwin explained as mutations that repeat themselves for the advancement of species. Intelligent design's course description was nearly identical to that of creationism, a religiously-based "science" (though untestable, so not much of a science at all). As far as Plato is concerned, people will vote based solely on their beliefs. If they believe in ID, they will vote for one of the six candidates who shares that belief. They will not make educated, logical decisions, but let their emotions interfere instead. Which seems to be good for Huntsman, the lone believer of a tried and true scientific theory. These items definitely are worthy of debate, considering the weight the court decision had on the Dover School Board. However, sciences should not be the only things being discussed, and should not be as important as helping fix the nations debt or unemployment rates, things that are more vital to the success of the nation.
Reply
Lupita Alcantar
9/6/2011 04:12:32 pm
The thorny issues for Republican candidates are related to science, the climate change and evolution (manufactured science) vs. intelligent design as for some candidates put it in this way. These are issues that are going on and tell us on who is right and can make a change for this new election of 2012 and for us to vote. The Republicans disagreed with supporting the climate change. According to Charles Darwin's natural selection theory, intelligent design, isn't much on the science part it goes towards creationism. This relates more to evolution of what the candidates discuss. The concern to Plato's respective of this is that the vote that people may choose will be from whom they want and believe in. He is concern and for his solution of dividing society into this. The items for debate are worthy, because it tells us on what each candidate beliefs are and for that there's a vote waiting for the new election of 2012.
Reply
Kevin Churchill
9/7/2011 08:32:17 am
2012's Republican candidates are forced to deal with two fragile issues, evolution and climate change. The debate on evolution is the trickier of the two, as the candidates must appeal both to the scientific community and the religious community. Most people believe that climate change can be explained by science, but many refute that evolution is a plausible theory. Their argument against evolution is that there are unexplainable traits that don't fit in with the survival of the fittest philosophy. Plato would think that citizens would vote purely out of emotion, and ignore the cold logic behind the scientific matters. Six of the candidates may benefit from the emotional attachment to creationism that may be prevalent in some parts of the country, but huntsman is likely to get support from key donors in the Silicon Valley. Climate change is worthy of debate, as it directly affects every person on the planet every day, but evolution is an issue that should take a back seat to more important issues such as the economy or foreign relations.
Reply
Faith C
9/7/2011 01:14:09 pm
Republican candidates are faced with a situation that forces them to choose one side or the other. These controversial questions are hard to answer without offending the beliefs of either side. Plato could argue that these topics are to emotional based and ignorance would also pay a factor. Climate change is worthy of debate because it allows for a counter argument without religious conflicts. Regarding Evolution, I don’t believe that voters are ready to discuss a topic such as this without being over emotional.
Reply
Amanda C
9/8/2011 09:56:10 am
The issues the Republican candidates have to face in the 2012 elections are evolution is climate change (global warming) and evolution. These items are on debate because it will show the people who the better candidates are to deal with these issues and how they handle the touchy subject. Many people have very strong beliefs about evolution and creationism and the people are not going to want to start more conflict with the government. If you were to ask Plato what he thinks about the candidates he would say that these issues are tough and people will vote purely based on their emotions and nothing else matters. I think these are worthy items for debate just because of the fact it will show people how the candidates deal with sticky situations.
Reply
Maddie Conover
9/8/2011 02:19:00 pm
The thorny issues discussed in the article "Climate, evolution thorny issues for GOP hopefuls" by Joe Garofoli and Carla Marinucci are just that: climate change, in terms of the science of global warming, as well as whether to teach evolution or creationism in public schools. The Grand Old Party has deep roots in religion, more specifically Christianity. It is because of this that evolution is a sensitive issue for Republican presidential candidate hopefuls. As stated in the article, conservative politicians often try to soften the issue by promoting "intelligent design", often criticized as a substitution for creationism. The article also implies that Republicans traditionally don't agree with the rationale behind climate change, but resist in challenging it; especially in California, which is described as the mecca of environmentalists and candidacy funds. Through the eyes of Plato, politicians should not drag their personal beliefs into their jobs of creating legislature and governing the people. Plato would disagree with debating evolution, since it has religious ties, targeting a persons emotions and personal philosophies. He would also denounce the candidates who pull in their beliefs into political play such as Texas governor Rick Perry. Plato would most likely support a candidate like Utah governor John Huntsman, because he supports scientific evidence rather than emotional influenced opinions. The topic of climate change is applicable to candidate debate not only because it has an affect on our economy, especially in California with the large agricultural influence, but also it is something that has to be addressed to protect the well beings of the citizens. Although discussing the principles of evolution in relation to what is being taught in our public school systems is valid, other topics such as the economy and national security should be the main focus of such debates, seeing as the current curriculum in public school pleases the majority of the population, while the economy is consistently ranked as the top worry for Americans today.
Reply
Gemma A
9/8/2011 02:45:04 pm
The rebublican candidates have been expressing their opinions on two very controversial topics: Climate change and evolution. The majority of the candidates oppose both. As political candidates, I believe that topics such as these should be discussed because they both affect the direction of our country. However, until all politicians are educated on both sides of the topics and can express their opinions using their own logic, evolution and climate change should not be debated. Being involved in a political campaign, we can presume that politicians are likely to emphasize their beliefs in order to appeal to certain demographics. Altering your views in order to gain something connects to Plato's view on democracy. Plato argues that under a democratic rule, people are driven by things such as fear and revenge to make decisions that ultimately may not be beneficial to the government and its people. Are these politicians letting their personal gain get in the way of their logic?
Reply
Brian Begerow
9/8/2011 02:48:27 pm
The issues that face the Republican Candidates are those involving the hot topics of climate change as well as the debate between evolution and intelligent design. These issues are very important as any side that the politicians choose on them could make or break their campaign towards presidency. As science progresses it becomes more and more commonly believed that evolution is how our complex society came to be. Still the majority of the candidates running for the Republican party oppose it. It's seems ridiculous that our own politicians campaign against scientific evidence when our country is based upon the continual progression of science and technology. If it were up to Plato, this topic would not be one of importance in an election. His ideas state that people will generally not vote without emotion and ignorance getting in the way. All these candidates are reluctant to move away from the traditional belief of intelligent design and accept the scientific evidence. Likewise many of the candidates don't actually believe that Climate change is happening or has any affect on us. The scary thing is that nearly half of California also thinks in this way. People will vote for candidates who share the same beliefs as them which raises the problem of a president who won't address the extremely important issue of climate change and how the upcoming generation needs to make some changes to help the problem. Again ignorance to science is getting in the way of the voters which is why those people would likely not vote in Plato's ideal society. These items are very worthy of debate, especially climate change. Global warming is a pressing issue in the world and has been scientifically proved to be real. The planet is in danger as the ignorance of our country and its politicians continue to bring it to the ground with their ignorance.
Reply
Alec Fetzer
9/8/2011 03:15:16 pm
Upcoming Republican candidates will face issues concerning global warming and the theory of intelligent design. These are important topics to see how the candidates deal with issues relating to science and some religions, at the same time. For many voters, the opinions of the candidates on this topic alone could affect their vote, which makes it a crucial aspect of their campaigns. Plato would say that no matter what the issue, and whether the voters are right or wrong concerning their side of the issue, they will continue to vote on what they solely believe and their pure emotion on the topic. Obviously, there are more important issues in our country right now, but also this gives voters a chance to see and hear from the other sides of candidates, because it seems we only hear about their views on the economy and foreign affairs; which are crucial to our country of course, but this gives voters a broadened view on their future president.
Reply
Lydia Erickson
9/8/2011 03:32:35 pm
The Republican Candidates are debating about the two extremely controversial topics: climate change and evolution. The climate change argument is being adressed due to the severe urgency of the problem and its constant presence in American lives. Evolution is being used as a way to state personal beliefs in order to sway voters to vote a certain way. In Plato's view of a society, their are too many emotions involved in the discussion about evolution. Though it is occurring right now, it should not be an issue involved in the presidential candidates' discussions or debates. Peoples beliefs about evolution are so deeply rooted in people, that they could be lead to vote a certain way, simply because they feel emotionally satisfied knowing their vote has their "morals". Plato would deem these people incapable of handling a society's government, because of their emotional motives. Climate change is also an emotional topic, but more concretely present, and it is something that the government can help change, whereas evolution is out of humanity's control. Climate change is highly important in the candidates discussion, because it is an issue that the US can strive to fix.
Reply
Maya Alamar
9/8/2011 04:28:14 pm
The issues that the Republican are dealing with for elections in 2012 revolve around certain issues with science. They are Evolution and Climate Change, a.k.a. Global Warming. They are debating over these issues for the better of how we teach and save our planet. With Platos ideas this is definitely an argument that will be lead with emotions.So Plato would most likely be frustrated with our Republicans.I think these issues are good ones to argue about, but I don't see them as top priority. When they could be debating for something more important. Like how to fix our economy's debt.
Reply
The Republicans are involved in a few issues, some causing people not to vote for them. In California alone, 61% of voters believe in climate change and 55% voters nationally. This brings problems for the Republicans because most disagree with the scientific research supporting climate change. The Republicans also look down on the evolution based on Darwin's ideas. I think Plato would be dissapointed with how the Republicans are holding them selves, they are letting emotions get the best of them. Global warming is a difficult topic for me I have heard anything from it will come and go to a tsunami will kill us all either way the government should focus on it.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Mr. LPart teacher/part entertainer/ part coach/ part task master Archives
November 2014
Categories |