Necessity - Part Two

Some types of research, whether scientific or otherwise, receive substantial public and/or private funding, especially when that research can be used to boost the egos of selfish male persons.

Meanwhile, more necessary research does not receive much funding at all, if any.

Little social research has been conducted, or funded, to investigate why that is the case, probably due to the fact that no-one with access to money is willing to fund it.

Such research is likely to be expensive, primarily due to the fact that selfishness is very difficult to prevent and apparently impossible to eradicate, in much the same way as stupidity.

Thoughtful discussions are not necessarily pleasant.  They are simply necessary.  They principally aim to enhance mutual understanding if not mutual respect and the advancement of shared principles.

Perhaps you do not believe it is necessary to gain a scientific understanding of selfishness and stupidity.

Perhaps you do not believe it is even necessary to gain a scientific understanding of civility.

What is science meant to achieve, from your point of view, and how, and why?

If you currently trust the media, or particular parts of it, why do you do so?

If you do not trust particular parts, or any parts of the media, why not?

How do you assess your own conduct as an investigator and communicator?

If you are an Australian citizen, or anyone with an intellectual and/or emotional and/or professional and/or political and/or economic interest in Australia, how have you been investing in the quality analysis of Australia?

How have you been examining its electoral possibilities, federal and state constitutions, various standards, the qualities of current and proposed political representatives, the structure of societal privileges and disadvantages, the distribution of political, social and economic power, and the influence of money?

How have you been assessing the necessity for emotional maturity in order to examine such matters with fairness, accuracy and thoroughness?

Have you ever been viewed as an enemy for merely seeking to improve something?

If so, why was that opposition so aggressive?

How do you usually distinguish between reasonable approaches to opposition and unreasonable ones?

How, for example, do you distinguish between reasonable and unreasonable views about structure and standards?

How do you tell when a technical standard is necessary?

How do you tell when a de facto standard is necessary?

How, for example, do you distinguish between reasonable and unreasonable views about gender? 

How do you measure improvements in courtesy?

How do you examine necessity in terms of economics?

How do you assess whether red tape is associated with necessary procedures to prevent disasters or whether the associated regulations are simply a nuisance?

Civility is all about being as thoroughly thoughtful as necessary.

What are your thoughts on the subject? 

Activity is necessary when attempting to uphold justice, yet such a practice requires prior thoughtfulness. 

You may be aware that investing in trustworthy collaborations is often necessary when seeking to acquire housing, employment or anything else of substantial importance in most people's lives.

Such collaborations are enhanced tremendously through the practice of consistent civility. 

Please assess your preferences carefully.

You are likely to be well aware that the suitable conservation of energy contributes considerably to the necessary conservation of life on Earth.

Perhaps you do not regard either conservation practice to be necessary. 

How do you decide whether an action is necessary or not?

How well can you focus your attention on matters of societal urgency for an hour or more at any necessary time? 

How do you identify those matters?

How do you try to convince other people of the urgency?

What are your most necessary contributions to society?

Enlightened activism is usually necessary in the absence of enlightened statecraft.

Unenlightened activism, like unenlightened statecraft, is never necessary.

For enlightened activism to thrive, real philanthropy is necessary.

How do you distinguish between the scientific, the honorific, the horrible, and the philanthropically prolific?

How philanthropically are you advancing awareness of science?

How philanthropically are you advancing improvements in the news media? 

Perhaps you do not regard such advancements as necessities.

How do you usually assess the good in relation to the necessary?

What is necessary about anything, and what is not?

What is good about anything, and what is not?

Money is not necessarily physical but many people require it to pay for food, accommodation, transport and suchlike requirements.

Growing food is a good idea.  Yet ideas do not have physical results until they are put into practice. 

When is transport necessary?

Discourteous persons often enjoy being noisy.  They may even enjoy poisoning the world and ruining lives through their recklessness.

True simplicity is the absence of excess.  It is not unnecessarily minimalist which is, in its own way, a form of excess.

True simplicity serves peace yet does not encourage boredom.  It is apt.  It is elegant.  It is necessary.