Things we didn't know about the B.B.C.

[scottycelt]

So how do you distinguish between the 'misuse' of the term & its 'true' application?

Well, if a politician (of whatever colour) tells one that his/her Party's latest policy wheeze is 'pure common sense' one might be naturally suspicious, Flossie, as all opinion polls normally reveal that such 'sense' can be very far from 'common' ..

However, if a friendly nurse advised one not to go out in the snow in one's vest and underpants as one may well catch one's death of cold, well, one may well conclude that she (or he if you prefer) had made a very valid point based on a pretty 'common' experience ... ?

[Pabmusic]

...as I've already hinted there may be more to reality than 'common sense'...

If this means something like "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy" it's quite a common argument, but not a particularly well founded one. The implication of course is that we can't know everything. True enough, but often the implication also carries the idea that, because of this, all things may be asserted equally - after all, we can't know everything, can we? That is a fallacy, since some beliefs require the abandonment of what we do know. They are much less likely to be true than a contrary assertion.

Unfortunately, there simply isn't a common-sense answer to many questions. Often, each party to a discussion thinks that their answer is 'common sense'. Clearly, some of these people are wrong, and he reason why is because common sense depends on the context, knowledge and experience of the observer. The 'man on the Clapham omnibus' quote just means that you should ignore any special pleading when deciding what is 'common sense' in a particular case.

[ahinton]

Well, if a politician (of whatever colour) tells one that his/her Party's latest policy wheeze is 'pure common sense' one might be naturally suspicious, Flossie, as all opinion polls normally reveal that such 'sense' can be very far from 'common' ..

However, if a friendly nurse advised one not to go out in the snow in one's vest and underpants as one may well catch one's death of cold, well, one may well conclude that she (or he if you prefer) had made a very valid point based on a pretty 'common' experience ... ?

"Common sense" is in itself a more than sufficiently daft and vacuous enough concept in itself; to add to that daftness and vacuity by referring to "pure common sense" injects either a sense of Puritanical dogma or a notion of contrived super-added antisepticism or an additional layer of sheer risibility (take you pick as to which)...

[scottycelt]

"Common sense" is in itself a more than sufficiently daft and vacuous enough concept in itself; to add to that daftness and vacuity by referring to "pure common sense" injects either a sense of Puritanical dogma or a notion of contrived super-added antisepticism or an additional layer of sheer risibility (take you pick as to which)...

Ah, so you'd quite happily frolic in your non-Puritanical vest and underpants in the snow quite oblivious to the obvious danger of catching your death of cold (not to mention likely police arrest).

You have my utter admiration, Sir!!

[scottycelt]

If this means something like "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy" it's quite a common argument, but not a particularly well founded one. The implication of course is that we can't know everything. True enough, but often the implication also carries the idea that, because of this, all things may be asserted equally - after all, we can't know everything, can we? That is a fallacy, since some beliefs require the abandonment of what we do know. They are much less likely to be true than a contrary assertion.

Unfortunately, there simply isn't a common-sense answer to many questions. Often, each party to a discussion thinks that their answer is 'common sense'. Clearly, some of these people are wrong, and he reason why is because common sense depends on the context, knowledge and experience of the observer. The 'man on the Clapham omnibus' quote just means that you should ignore any special pleading when deciding what is 'common sense' in a particular case.

Yes, but here again we appear to be referring to a misuse of the phrase. I agree with all of that, or at least most of it.

The real debate (though wildly off-topic) is whether there is such a thing as a 'common sense' at all. Things like not going too near a fire if one does not wish to be burnt or wearing suitable clothing in sub-zero temperatures seems to me to fall into such a category and would be widely acknowledged by most of us to be 'common sense'.

I simply disagree with those members who appear to be claiming that a 'common sense' doesn't really exist and is therefore a 'non sense' ...

[Flosshilde]

So basically you're saying that it's common sense that common sense exists?

[Pabmusic]

So basically you're saying that it's common sense that common sense exists?

No, of course not. Use your common sense.

[MrGongGong]

The real debate (though wildly off-topic) is whether there is such a thing as a 'common sense' at all. Things like not going too near a fire if one does not wish to be burnt or wearing suitable clothing in sub-zero temperatures seems to me to fall into such a category and would be widely acknowledged by most of us to be 'common sense'.

Apart from those who like to indulge in a bit of firewalking
or an icy plunge pool that is ..................

[Bryn]

Ah, so you'd quite happily frolic in your non-Puritanical vest and underpants in the snow quite oblivious to the obvious danger of catching your death of cold (not to mention likely police arrest).

You have my utter admiration, Sir!!

I take it that the character on the right is an officer of the law:

[MrGongGong]

I take it that the character on the right is an officer of the law:

Is this what the Cardinals have in mind for Gay folk who want to get married ?

(if so count me in .........)

[scottycelt]

So basically you're saying that it's common sense that common sense exists?

Well if the sense is 'common' in that sense the sense must be experienced by many and therefore both the belief in the existence of the sense and the actual sense itself can therefore be accurately described as 'common sense'?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_sense

[vinteuil]

... some people seem to respond to situations by saying "It's only common sense!"

Others by saying "I think you will find it's a bit more complicated than that... "

And of the latter am I.

[MrGongGong]

... some people seem to respond to situations by saying "It's only common sense!"

Others by saying "I think you will find it's a bit more complicated than that... "

And of the latter am I.

[amateur51]

... some people seem to respond to situations by saying "It's only common sense!"

Others by saying "I think you will find it's a bit more complicated than that... "

And of the latter am I.

likewise, I'm sure

[scottycelt]

... some people seem to respond to situations by saying "It's only common sense!"

Others by saying "I think you will find it's a bit more complicated than that... "

And of the latter am I.

That's a gross simplification in itself.

It surely depends on the situation. How would you describe advice not to stand on the edge of a precipice and look down if one suffers from vertigo?

Wise? Sensible? Common Sense?

I suspect most of us are not too fussy about the wording ... we simply understand the good sense of the advice.