A critic charges Hyehudi Editor with making properly scientific assertions lacking any scientific grounding.
First, who says the article was in all earnestness? I note a humorous tone throughout.
Second, I don’t know of anyone who dared investigate whether or not politician equals psychopath, etc. (Either they don’t want to find out, or they did and the results were spiked.)
The arguments for and against (often deceptive) do provoke thought.
Turn to an untapped market and get in on the ground floor!
No, it’s probably not “legal”, but it isn’t legal at the Kosel, either, so…
Disclaimer: Satire, as always.
Ludwig Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations p. 223):
“If a lion could speak, we could not understand him.”
Now, the same is true for wild animals in human form (read: politicians).
Unlike a human being, the internal mind of a politician concerns itself with power alone and he cannot feel pain or empathy, step outside egotism, nor even think about tomorrow, so the humanlike sounds he emits are not, in fact, translatable. It’s not even “Might Makes Right“.
The prey may tell themselves the politician is making “promises” of “goodies” and\or taxing “someone else” for them, but this is just anthropomorphism, apophenia, wishful thinking, and psychological projection.
Accusing a politician of sinning with his tongue or pen is only true by way of metaphor.
When Eshkol said “נכון שהבטחתי, אבל לא הבטחתי לקיים”, he didn’t even mean: “By ‘promise’ I don’t mean whatever it is humans think I meant by ‘promising’; I was just making special sounds to benefit myself“. Rather he was still making those sounds humans read incorrectly as (in Human Hebrew): נכון שהבטחתי, אבל לא הבטחתי לקיים, a nonsensical sentence. Pols don’t “shut off” the reptilian brain and switch; they’re always being themselves.
The only way to understand a politician is to be (Heaven forfend!) of the same “min briyah” of the s̶e̶r̶p̶e̶n̶t̶ (oops, I mean politician).
(On bureaucratic language, see this.)