Reasoned Judgment: A major pet peeve of mine, notwithstanding my own limitations and that of various modes of analysis (e.g., short article, speech, debate point must each work within the limits of their genre), is the use of bad arguments. This includes shoddy justification, exaggerated claims, and attacks with more emotion than substance. A particularly bothersome strategy is arguing from bad premises -- a house, no matter how lovely, will fall, if the foundation is made of sand. It might take a while to prove it, and that's the rub -- appearance sometimes is all one needs to win the day.

This troubles me no matter who does it, though I follow the norm of concentrating on material I tend to agree with (matching my beliefs, "neutral" material, material that examines all the sides, and material I partly disagree with ... though more well rounded than just listening to "talk radio" or NPR, this surely isn't a perfect circle either). My heart might be with someone, but I still might think they are wrong in a particular case. [I also might respect the argument of an opponent or even agree on a particular point, but believe they are still basically wrong. Too often people deem either one of these things impossible.]

I find it useful that I personally am somewhat close or deal with people I disagree with, though generally respect. I sometimes wonder how certain people disagree with me; not on all things mind you, but on particular matters that seem so "obvious." The fact they do not, however, keeps me honest -- I cannot totally demonize or belittle those who in some form share the beliefs of family and friends. This wide breadth also influences my belief in equality, since I know/respect/love someone that in some form fits nearly any group one can imagine. So, how can I not equally respect their kindred? Not perfectly mind ya ... but in general, it helps to keep me honest.

---

Interesting: The NYT had a fascinating article comparing the languages of China and Japan. China tries to translate foreign terms into Chinese, while Japan has a special (and limited number of) sort of character to deal with foreigners. This includes those born in Japan, but who left the country. This is taken to the degree that if a Japanese parent wanted to call their child "George Bush," they could only use the state sanctioned wording. On that subject, an interesting opinion piece uses Napolean's "French Revolution by force" strategy to suggest the problems with the means we use to promote arguably ideal ends in the Middle East.

[Update: I was notified the struck out phrase was included in error; upon re-reading the article, the relevant portion said "First are the Chinese characters, called kanji here. Japanese names are written in kanji. Currently, the number of kanji permitted for names stands at 2,230, and selecting a character outside this list is illegal." A bit more info supplied by my source:

Japanese uses two syllabaries, katakana and hiragana. They look different but are identical - same set of syllables are used. The NYT story ... underplays the degree to which English is used in place of and in addition to the three indigenous writing sets (none of which are in fact indigenous, but you get the idea), a lot of it nonsensical advertising.

Again, I appreciate any corrections or comments ... "my own limitations," indeed! Lol.]

---
Happy ... St. Patrick's Day. Friday is St. Joseph's Day, which I know about not only because it's my name, but also because it is in honor of the patron saint of my other half ... Italians [though, a bit ironically, I was named after my Irish grandfather]. Perhaps, us Irish/Italian mutts should have a special day -- March 18 -- I'll call it St. JP day, though in my case, I'd allow homosexuals to march in the parade.