[lbo-talk] internally riven

[shag carpet bomb]

At 11:26 PM 4/12/2009, Eubulides wrote:
>----- Original Message ----- From: "shag carpet bomb" <shag at cleandraws.com>
>
>>i often don't understand your particular specialist language Ian. What 
>>are you talking about when you use the word "independence" and "stories 
>>of independence"?
>>
>>shag
>
>==============
>
>1st example: the everyday use of the term in, say, claims of the 
>independence of central banks -- demolished by, among others, Matthew 
>Watson in 'The Institutional Paradoxes of Monetary Orthodoxy: Reflections 
>on the Political Economy of Central Bank Independence', Review of 
>International Political Economy, 9 (1), 2002, 183-196. The ridiculousness 
>of the claim is now apparent to to just about every adult on the planet 
>with access to a newspaper, television or internet connection and has a 
>modicum of education.
>
>2nd example: the paradoxes of claims of independence in some schools of 
>moral epistemology which presuppose realism; to wit "the truth of the 
>wrongfulness of abortion is independent of any possible proof we could 
>give for the claim -- i.e. a moralist's version of a typical maneuver in 
>defense of alethic realism; truth outruns proof. One need only causally 
>peruse the various schools of post, or rather, non realist thinking about 
>moralese to identify the staggering number of problems associated with the 
>approach.
>
>Miles claim suffers casually from fallacies of composition and fallacies 
>of subtraction/division; it is a sorites problem. That it is a sorites 
>problem does not entail methodological or ontological individualism. I can 
>provide refs. on request but the last thing you need is more texts to look 
>at :-)
>
>Interdependencies abound.
>
>Ian

but what does this have to do with what is typically taught in a soc 101 
class?

shag

--
http://cleandraws.com
Wear Clean Draws