Health Care Debate Based on Lack of Logic
August 26, 2009 by Jeanna Bryner
With all due respect to Professor Hoffman, wouldn't a totally rational person look at government's track record of domestic policy (i.e., Social Security, education, etc.) and question whether the federal government should be involved in health care at all? And on the justifications for the Iraq war, did Hoffman's study include any real evidence or did it focus only on the left wing media narrative (which includes numerous false assertions about what the Bush administration actually said - what happened to all the 1990s evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with numerous terrorists)?
Heated partisan debate over President Obama's health care plan, erupting at town hall meetings and in the blogosphere, has more to do with our illogical thought processes than reality, sociologists are finding.
The problem: People on both sides of the political aisle often work backward from a firm conclusion to find supporting facts, rather than letting evidence inform their views.
A totally rational person would lay out — and evaluate objectively — the pros and cons of a health care overhaul before choosing to support or oppose a plan. But we humans are not so rational, according to Steve Hoffman, a visiting professor of sociology at the University of Buffalo.
government, health care, news media, bias, war,