Looking forward to the book. A thought that struck me this morning that led to a question that you may have already answered or address in the book: why is the period of the neutral world so short?
I can see that but I'm wondering why that is or if it has to be. For example, maybe one can consider how the law and popular opinion shifted on homosexuality. I'm not sure where one would draw the line between negative-neutral-positive on this, but it wasn't a very long time between Lawrence v. Texas and Obergefell, and what’s happened since. It took about 13 years to go from sodomy being outlawed to sodomy essentially being promoted to children as a matter of public policy. It seems to me that a “neutral world” regarding this issue would perhaps be somewhere between sodomy being illegal and sodomy being promoted to children and celebrated officially for a whole month (or more). In that sense, I don’t think the neutral band has to be necessarily as narrow as a single point on the x-axis.
One could make similar observations about, say, race relations. It seems like it didn’t take very long to go from one race being favored as a matter of policy, to an ostensibly neutral world of race neutrality, to other races being favored as a matter of policy. Similarly, it doesn’t seem like that such a neutral world necessarily has to be short-lived.
Looking forward to the book. A thought that struck me this morning that led to a question that you may have already answered or address in the book: why is the period of the neutral world so short?
If you draw a line on a graph, it only intersects the X axis at one point. I think it's basically an artifact of neutral being a narrow range.
I can see that but I'm wondering why that is or if it has to be. For example, maybe one can consider how the law and popular opinion shifted on homosexuality. I'm not sure where one would draw the line between negative-neutral-positive on this, but it wasn't a very long time between Lawrence v. Texas and Obergefell, and what’s happened since. It took about 13 years to go from sodomy being outlawed to sodomy essentially being promoted to children as a matter of public policy. It seems to me that a “neutral world” regarding this issue would perhaps be somewhere between sodomy being illegal and sodomy being promoted to children and celebrated officially for a whole month (or more). In that sense, I don’t think the neutral band has to be necessarily as narrow as a single point on the x-axis.
One could make similar observations about, say, race relations. It seems like it didn’t take very long to go from one race being favored as a matter of policy, to an ostensibly neutral world of race neutrality, to other races being favored as a matter of policy. Similarly, it doesn’t seem like that such a neutral world necessarily has to be short-lived.