Here's a fun story for friday afternoon.
This past monday, I participated in my first ever public debate. The debate, which was sponsored by USD's philosophy club, was entitled "To Vote or Not to Vote." My sparring partner in the debate was Dr. Dominguez of the political science department here at USD. About 70 students showed up for the debate.
In the debate, I argued for 3 claims, none of which are original to me:
- if you're going to vote, you should vote absentee (I'm pretty sure I first saw this argument made by Thomas Nadelhoffer, but I can't find the blog post)
- if you're going to vote, you ought to vote well, i.e., not vote badly (this argument was largely influenced by Jason Brennan)
- that democracy is flawed insofar as it values quantity of opinion over quality of opinion (think Plato's Crito)
The debate went really well, and there was a good period of questions and discussion afterwards. As the hubub was dying down, two students approached. They were from the Vista, USD's student newspaper. They asked if I had anything else to say. Now, the Vista isn't known for its accuracy; case in point, a few weeks back it reported that the Hadron collider is 27 meters across. So, knowing its track record, I got a bit worried. I told the students that as long as they reported accurately, I had nothing to add to what I said in the debate.
On wednesday, the front page of the Vista reports that "the highlight of the discussion was Dr. Kevin Timpe's unusual view that voting is immoral." GROAN.
I vascilate between amused and irritated. My letter to the editor, which I've submitted for next week's edition, is below the fold.
--------------
Once again, I find myself disappointed in the accuracy of the
In the 2 October article entitled "Voting Question Raises Debate" on the "To Vote or Not to Vote" debate sponsored by USD's Philosophy Club, you report that I think that "voting is immoral." This is simply false. Rather, what I argued in the debate is that voting badly is immoral. That is, I argued that the obligation involved in voting is an obligation to vote well if one votes. I explicitly said that people do and should have the right to vote, but that having the right to do something does not automatically entail an obligation to do that thing.
I compared voting in this respect to other obligations that we have. We have the right to become parents, but are not obligated to become parents. However, if we do become parents, we ought to be responsible, good parents. Similarly, one has the right to exercise freedom of the press and report on events, but one is not obligated to use that right. If one does, however, one ought to do it well. And exercising freedom of the press well includes being accurate in what one reports.
If the
Tsk, tsk, Kevin
Yes Vista was unfair. This topic has interesting mental blocks associated with it - few people seem able to even hear arguments against voting badly.