Bulverism

Ezekiel Bulver grew up in a household with arguing parents. This is not unusual in itself; what is unusual is the manner in which Bulver's parents argued. Instead of proving each other wrong, each parent would assume the other is wrong, and inform why they are wrong. Young Bulver witnessed this and realized that disproving is an unnecessary aspect of argument. He grew up and changed the world with this discovery; now everyone simply assumes his/her opponent is wrong without attempting to prove it.

While Ezekiel Bulver is fictitious (in fact, his story never came to fruition), his idea, the titular subject of C.S. Lewis' "Bulverism", is indeed real. In fact, it is tragically thriving still today. Lewis' essay, found in God in the Dock, sheds light on a very relevant topic. Closely related to the last post's subject (looking at versus looking along), Bulverism is a result of narrow-mindedness and involves one selfishly assuming he/she is right without taking a step away and actually analyzing both sides of the argument. The example Lewis gives involves him thinking he has a large balance at the bank. One practicing Bulverism would assume it is merely wishful thinking and wouldn't actually do the number-crunching himself to see if Lewis is correct.

I think the most interesting aspect of Bulverism involves the distinction between "reasons" and "causes". Reasons are inferences that we form based on data; in other words, reasons are based on logic. Conversely, causes are motives not based on logic that lead us to believe something. For example, if I am a prisoner on death row, and I oppose the death penalty because I don't want to die, my belief is based on a cause. On the other hand, if I am a prisoner on death row, and I oppose the death penalty because I sincerely think it is wrong to kill someone for their past sins against society, my belief is based on a reason. A Bulverist will argue that his/her opponent's beliefs are entirely based on causes, and that his/her own are based entirely on reasons. To avoid Bulverism, we must take a step back, and we must look at the problem itself, in lieu of looking at why people believe things about the problem.

From my observations, the most prolific arena of Bulverism is the political realm. Politicians will always assume that they have the right answers for everything. This leads them to believe that there is no point in taking a step back and examining the issue at hand. Instead, they spend all of their energy arguing why their opponents believe what they do. Society would improve drastically if politicians looked at issues objectively. Politicians, however, are not the only ones to blame. We, the voters, are also guilty of being Bulverists. When we vote, we assume socialism is wrong because socialists just want it because of their poverty. We assume capitalism is wrong because capitalists just want it because it would increase their wealth. Just like the need to look along as well as at, we need to develop a strong case of humility in order to admit we aren't always right.

If only Ezekiel Bulver had never triumphed this wretched idea.