The independent news organization of Duke University
This is the general pattern of the column: the author will throw a weak rhetorical punch before running away. In the end, all we come away with is knowledge of the things he dislikes—a boring read made confusing by its lack of purposeful moves.
What we need to realize, collectively, is that nobody who is genuinely interested in your perspective is going to challenge you to a debate. If they wanted to understand you, they’d ask you to explain your beliefs—they would have a discussion.
Developing some ethical code, and a willingness to engage with the context of a moral dilemma, are the best way to resolve contradictions when we face them.
The best essays become proverbs because both are the product of a clear mind.
If we continue to pretend that these parties define the spectrum of political thought, we’ll have to get used to mental gymnastics. There will be nothing principled or consistent coming down the pipeline.
Don’t only wonder if what you’re saying makes sense, or is appropriate. Consider what you have to believe about yourself, society, or morality in order to say it. It’ll teach you a lot about yourself.
Once you know it to be unjust, upholding the status quo makes you part of the problem. Don’t be a centrist.
If you believe that America needs a third party, there’s no time like the present.
Experiences like that showed me that humiliation isn't a prerequisite for humility. Individuals can be changed without going through pain.
Fox News’ appeals to Christianity are more visible than a single progressive pastor’s, but that doesn’t mean they’re the “faithful” side, not unless you’re judging by conspicuity.
This is the general pattern of the column: the author will throw a weak rhetorical punch before running away. In the end, all we come away with is knowledge of the things he dislikes—a boring read made confusing by its lack of purposeful moves.
