[Campaigns-l] Matricies

[politics at nymar.demon.co.uk]

Morten Lange:
> I have been thinking of the need for such pro-et                           
> contra matrices regarding several hotly debated issues, like the Greenhouse                           
> effect, methods for curbing traffic deaths, the scientific bicycle helmet                             
> debate and more.                                                                                      

mmm, yes... but if this lives up to its true potential, we're going to need 
more than just pro- and con-

As an example: climate change. Some of the questions to be considered:

* Is it happening?
* Human or Natural Causes
** If "human" is it useful to assign blame
*** If so, to whom, and to what end
* Should something be done
** If not, what criteria to evaluate the correctness of the decision
** If so, what exactly?
***and how much, over how long and paid for by whom?

Now, I know that no-one was proposing a debate entitled 
"climate change - for or against?" and I'm sure that no one would
try and organise the issues quites so simplisticly. All the same
that's just the sort of thinking that gets trotted out in too many
debates. Probably because it's easier to cloud the issues (or just CYA)
if you can switch tracks in mid debate.

I believe that binary thinking is a disease of modern politics.  It seems 
everything must be reduced to a binary choice with two wrong answers. 
This project has the potential to raise awareness of the complexities of
many issues, and (by sructuring the issues clearly) to deonstrate
that complex and confusing need not mean the same thing.

Nick Fortune