Eubulides
Ah, one of CB's favorite strategies is to incessantly shift the burden of proof to other parties in the discussion/argument to immunize his own defeasible views from counterevidence that suggest the need for change.....
^^^^^
CB: Well, I won't take up the burden of arguing against your generalization about my strategy. Do you think N. was not petit bourgeois ?
I didn't really intend to put a burden of proof on Jeffrey ( exchange recopied below).
At some level, all I know about N.'s personal history seems that he was petit bourgeoisie. Was he really bourgeois, working class, aristocratic or a peasant ? He didn't seem to be rich. It seems on the prima facie evidence that he is petit bourgeoise, so I was wondering why Jeffrey considers the label wrong.
^^^^^
well, like i said, i think the former betrays the latter (a la hegel). we tend to throw around the labels and people who haven't done the work just pick up the label. it misses so much of the point. and anyway i think the label is wrong. :)
^^^^ CB: Well, I can go with that honesty. I kind of suspected that. The thing to do might be to make an argument why he is not "petit bourgeois". Although I guess you don't think of class analysis as important as I do.