How many hours spent “watching the news”—in any of the various mediums and regardless of any political slant— would be necessary to understand the current events of the world? Perhaps with a supercomputer parsing the Internet and with the ability to simultaneously watch a set of international television stations could an individual come close to gaining an idea of all the notable events around the world during a single moment. But the answer cannot be quantified in this way—in fact there isn’t an answer. Even with this scenario, the individual may eventually succeed in becoming aware of the significant events globally, but the question is how much does the individual understand?
Mainstream media, to an extent, succeeds in the above endeavor each day—supercomputers scan the Internet and reporters search around the world. But in the up-to-the-minute onslaught of breaking news, the viewer is aware of every event while remaining very much oblivious to the surrounding circumstances of each. The data is devoid of context—the facts are often without historic or analytical details—and the individual is deprived of understanding.
It is possible science contains the answers that questions about religion beg, such as the common debate about creationism, the existence of God, etc. How large of a grasp does science have on the origin of emotional existence?
June 7, 2010, at 11:38 pm — Blogs
From birth, we are convinced that there is one “order”, one true way to exist, and we, as American citizens, must abide by this order so that our saftey is dually enforced.
The truth may set you free but it doesn’t mean anyone else is going to believe you. At least that seems to be the way the world works these days. We are a people of skepticism and suspicion. We thrive on it, heck the entire internet is practically built on rumor and innuendo. In modern tabloid journalism a rumor and one anonymous source is all that stands between a publication and a viral click.
Too often our elected officials use their official positions to spin, stretch and sometimes out right lie about any given issue that may be in debate in government. On CNN’s iReport today I proposed the idea of a Truth Amendment to the Constitution that would require any and all elected officials to swear to tell the truth in the same manner anyone in a court of law may be required.