Four Corners
March 22, 2021
This is the sixth in a series by Arthur Peña, Charles Randall Paul, and Jacob Hess called “Inevitable Influencers: Why (deep down) we all want—and need—to persuade each other of what we see as good, beautiful, and true.” Previous pieces include “Why Persuasion Should be a Sweet (Not a Dirty) Word”; “The Threat of Persuasion,” and “My Truth? Your Truth? No Truth?”; “The Virtues of Strong Disagreement,” and “Our Judgment Against Judgment.”
A new “manifesto” on radical orthodoxy has been widely discussed. Where did its ideas originate? One author explains.
Covid is setting generations against each other. But it doesn’t have to. Latter-day Saint practices have helped prevent much of the present generational angst.
This election is an agonizing choice for those who value liberalism. President Trump is personally illiberal in his tendencies but his administration has largely been committed to procedural protections and the rule of law. A Biden administration presents the exact mirror image. Either way, liberalism loses.
Trump is not as bad as his critics would have you believe, but he remains the antithesis of the American liberal ideal. We should use this chance to repudiate him.
This election, the way to select the best choice for office is to focus less on individual personalities and more on the path on which the philosophies of each of the candidates and their fellow travelers will cause us to journey.
Continuing our effort to feature different perspectives on the best choice in the upcoming U.S. election.
President Trump’s comments have been rightly scrutinized for their potential impact on America’s post-election environment. Far less attention has gone to certain themes of progressive commentary, which in combination arguably heightens the volatility of our post-election atmosphere.
When the places we used to find fellowship and connection as a community start to “take a stand” on political issues, where do we go to find that unity again?
The division is growing. And the American people are weary. But the truth of forgiveness and reconciliation is no less available and promising. One mediator’s perspective.
It’s nice to be able to say we trust “only what our own logic or reasoning” tell us. That can feel satisfying. But what happens when a legitimate threat exists outside the boundaries of our own logic and reasoning? Could this be a good time to trust something more than just that?
The dwindling sense of a common pursuit of truth is contributing to a deteriorating public discourse. Maybe it’s time to stand up for the truth about truth.