"It is now highly feasible to take care of everybody on Earth at a higher standard of living than any have ever known. It no longer has to be you or me. Selfishness is unnecessary. War is obsolete. It is a matter of converting our high technology from WEAPONRY to LIVINGRY."
- Buckminster Fuller (h/t Suzy Waldman)

Monday, October 29, 2007

Speaking of Dramatic Changes

Via Slashdot, Matthew Chapman of the Washington Post makes the modest suggestion that the presidential candidates have a debate on science. A closed book exam as it were.

The Slashdot discussion seems better than their norm these days, maybe because it is about ideas and not about facts. hmmmm... There's some irony there.

1 comment:

RM Reiss said...

David Brooks, the NY Times mind-controller and savant, also offers advice to the candidates:


Maybe Brooks' piece answers Chapman. And supplies an explanation as to why a majority of Americans resist belief in evolution, the branch of science that most directly affects one's own sense of meaning in the universe. From Brooks' column, we are a happy bunch:

"Researchers from Pew found that 65 percent of Americans are satisfied over all with their own lives — one of the highest rates of personal satisfaction in the world today."

But the next President shouldn't ask us to change any habits:

"...don’t propose any program that will interfere with the way voters are currently organizing their lives. They don’t want you there."