Frank Dresser wrote:

I don't know if this is true, but let's restate the idea a little. Let's
say liberals are more likely to live in the theoretical world and
conservatives are more likely to live in the practical world. Practical in
the sense of hands on, working with tools, etc.

For every theory, a counter theory can be assembled using different
assumptions. Of course, many theories can be tossed out on logical grounds,
but many will stand fast until confirmed or disproved by actual facts. In
the theoretical world, very little is really settled.

But in the practical world, poor assumptions are often disproven
immediately. If something doesn't work, it doesn't work. Every one who
works with making things or fixing things knows full well that 90% of new
ideas are crud. Ideas proven by the test of time are highly valued.

Frank Dresser


Frank,

Is this a straw-man argument or are you actually saying conservatives
are pragmatic rather than ideological? It certainly isn't true. How
much real-world hands-on training have Condi Rice, Perle & Wolfowitz,
and Dubya himself had? Was the Laffer curve based on empirical
observation?

There are leftists of the academy and rightists of the academy, and
working leftists and working rightists. I don't think any
of the generalizations that have cropped up in this thread can be
said to apply all too accurately.

Every argument of this kind, including yours, boils down to "hooray
for our side" The liberal guys all say liberals are smarter
and more cultured, and the rightist guys say conservatives are smarter,
or in this case practical and realistic. There are smart people on both
sides, and opinionated or non-thinking dummies on both sides, with no
clear balance one way or the other. IMHO.

Oz