[lbo-talk] Blue Dogs cashing in

[ravi]

On Jul 26, 2009, at 7:15 AM, Marv Gandall wrote:
> "It is very easy to inveigh against slavery and similar things in  
> general
> terms, and to give vent to high moral indignation at such infamies.
> Unfortunately all that this conveys is only what everyone knows,  
> namely,
> that these institutions of antiquity are no longer in accord with our
> present conditions and our sentiments, which these conditions  
> determine. But
> it does not tell us one word as to how these institutions arose, why  
> they
> existed, and what role they played in history."

So? ;-) Knowing those details is productive, but just because some  
utterance doesn't aid that research doesn't mean such an utterance is  
worthless.

Second, the response that "this conveys ... what everyone knows ...  
that these institutions are ... no longer in accord with our present  
conditions" seems altogether too clever. Most "inveighing" (which is  
just a sort of "weasel word"(*) for a moral argument to which no  
counter-argument is available) happens at a time when these  
institutions are an accepted part of society and such "inveighing" is  
arguably one of the agents of change that abolish (or as the quote  
puts it: makes them "no longer in accord with our sentiments") these  
practices.

(*) This reasoning seems to elevate discomfort to a philosophical  
position.

	--ravi

--
Anyone who takes an effort to intellectually challenge the status quo  
and established habits is infinitely more venerable than hacks  
defending that status quo and established habits, regardless of the  
truth function of their propositions. -- W.Sokolowski