[lbo-talk] Collective idiocy....

[andie_nachgeborenen]

Whether it's rational to attempt to explain particular acts is an important question, if you are a philosopher. Why do you ask? My guess is that the answer depends a lot on that, and whether its rational depends on the success or likelihood of success of particular explanatory patterns. Sure grounds exist to expect that particular acts can be interpreted, which not self-evidently the same thing as explained, but grounds may also exist to think that particular acts can be explained. They may not be explicable as the result of rational calculation, but after Nietzsche and Freud, that's old news. A lot may depend on what you mean by "explained" -- does this require general laws of human behavior that we don't have? But before I go on (I wrote a whole dissertation and several published papers on these questions), what are you really asking and why? 

Sent from my iPad

On Dec 17, 2012, at 10:52 AM, "Carrol Cox" <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:


> I just readjusted the angle of my keyboard by about 1/2 an inch.
> 
> Is it rational for anyone to attempt to "explain" that particular act by a
> particular person at a particular time?
> 
> Do grounds exist for any expectation that particular acts can be
> interpreted?
> 
> Could someone look up the passage in which Hamlet denies that he can be read
> like a book.
> 
> Carrol
> 
> 
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk