/ world today news/ The following lines are in connection with the note dated 05/05/2021 by Dora Chichkova* regarding the response of a “politically illiterate woman” to her being informed by the president that he intends to invite experts from the left to the caretaker government. And are they caused by the emerging question, is it only about political illiteracy?
As Immanuel Kant mentions, the subjective sufficiency of a judgment is called conviction (for oneself), and the objective one is credibility (for everyone). According to him, if reason is defined at all as the faculty of grasping rules, then the faculty of judgment is the faculty of bringing under rules, i.e. of distinguishing whether something is subject to a given rule (the case of the given law) or not. General logic does not and cannot contain any prescriptions for the faculty of reasoning, which is a special talent that cannot be taught. Therefore, this ability is the specific of the so-called natural intelligence, the lack of which cannot be replaced by any school. For, though the school may suggest, and, as it were, inculcate upon some limited mind some rules borrowed from foreign knowledge, yet the faculty of making a proper use of them must belong to the pupil himself. For no rule which could be prescribed to him for such a purpose, in the absence of the said natural endowment, is safe from abuse. From this point of view, leaving aside all other possible hypotheses regarding his purpose, and focusing only on what he is talking about – the left, not the party of the person mentioned by Chichkova, with the president informing her about his intention, for each capable of judgment with objective sufficiency as it is reliably clear and intelligible what he means. With your answer “the politically illiterate woman”, clearly perceiving the party of which she has stumbled to be and remain president as the embodiment of the left that the president speaks of, demonstrates at best no more than a capacity for reasoning with subjective sufficiency as a conviction about herself. Which obviously determines, as far as it can be characterized as political, her behavior not only in relation to anyone from that party, but also in relation to all those who are not members of the formation in question. At the same time, she complains that she offered her hand to so-and-so, and they did not want to respond to her invitation to take her. If he possessed as a natural intelligence a faculty of judgment, and with an objective sufficiency as a certainty for every one, “the politically illiterate woman” would not have responded to the President’s informing her of his intention as he did. With which expression, leaving aside the “problem” that does not deserve any attention, whether at all and to what extent what he stated is an expression of taking sides as a manifestation of bias towards any party puts the president in an explanatory mode, essentially the discussed “politically illiterate woman” gave an additional argument to anyone on the left outside her party not to lend her a hand. The inability, including for reliable judgment, as Kant notes, is precisely what is called stupidity, a defect that cannot be helped at all.
* Dora Chichkova: Cornelia is indeed a “politically illiterate woman”
#political #illiteracy
