Once we see that non-violence has difficulty responding to these
sorts of hypothetical questions, we then decide that non-violence is impractical for life in general, and don't even try to practice it.
In their request, Venditto's attorneys cited prosecutors»
use of hypothetical questions as «inappropriate» and «egregious» because they asked the witnesses what they would have done if they had known Venditto had lied or accepted bribes.
The visioneers who tackle the tough, subjective questions, such as what are the best ways to improve fuel consumption, however, must possess more than an ability to search for and utilize established facts, they need the intangible
gift of hypothetical questioning.
But putting that hypothetical aside for now, here is what I DO know... these
sorts of hypothetical questions are often used to discredit any teaching about non-violence.
But federal prosecutors, in a filing responding to the motion, argued the
use of hypothetical questions was legally proper in examining the «quality and integrity» of Oyster Bay's management, which they said was key to the charges against Venditto.
In judging these sort
of hypothetical questions, I always look back to the polls we used to see in the final months of the Blair government, asking people how they would vote if Gordon Brown was leader.