[lbo-talk] Crap architecture

[// ravi]

On Sep 18, 2011, at 10:41 PM, Carrol Cox wrote:
> On 9/18/2011 7:15 PM, // ravi wrote:
> 
>> This is the issue, then, isn’t it? That value judgements are offensive. Don’t conservatives (not pomos) think the same way? They don’t like the idea that one theory might be “better” than another - in particular that their theory (say creationism) is at the receiving end of judgement calls (now, I use quotes for “better” and other judgement words, because these all imply a criteria, which I will withhold getting into until called for). (Also, liberals have the same idea too in a different sense, it seems - they don’t, per popular depiction of them, want kids to be ranked by skill or performance in some test. They are ridiculed for wanting everyone to be a winner.).
> 
> The basic thesis is simply that they do  not exist, that they are an illusion,mere redundancies added to conclusions or actions otherwise generated.
> 

But they do exist, don’t they? Not just in the Quinean example of pegasus as existence by reference, but in the more robust sense of existence by meaningful use or utility: “Try the calamari, it’s excellent”. “There are no good Indian restaurants in New York City”. “The new MoMA is terrible". Obviously people say these things - all the time - because they convey useful (or usable) information. They do not have scientific accuracy or universalised and measurable criteria of justification. So what?

I understand that just saying “X is crap” doesn’t impart much to the reader. But the list has been, thankfully, more than just about imparting knowledge or other practical matters!

	—ravi