(Stick a fork in it (or in me). I think this thread is done.)
I wrote:
> > I didn't say that "a single abstraction" could do so.
Tom Walker writes:
>Why do I get the feeling that your favorite tropes are "I didn't say" and
>"what you said implies . . ."
On the first, communication is very impor
Rorty, an old teacher of mine, views himself as a left liberal. His Achieving Our
Country is advertised as a way of rethinking reformist (we might say) politics. He
writes for Dissent. He is an anti-Marxist, but that is not enough to make you not on
the left. Dewey was an advocate of worker con
Hi again, Jim,
Sed I:
>>I'd've thought you could make a case for a logical, empirically tenable
>>methodology that allows for what a symbol/institution/action might mean in
>>the context of its day, or of any particular time and place?!
Sed you:
>I'm not sure what that has to do with literary
Jim Devine wrote,
> I didn't say that "a single abstraction" could do so.
Why do I get the feeling that your favorite tropes are "I didn't say" and
"what you said implies . . ."
> I agree with Levins & Lewontin, in their DIALECTICAL BIOLOGIST, that
> neither the whole not the parts have ontolog
Justin,
Please see my reply to Tom Walker where I both criticize hermeneutics and
empiricism.
btw, to my knowledge, Richard Rorty has nothing do with left. He is a new
pragmatic following the footsteps of Dewey...
thanks,
Mine
>Mine,
>I am actually a "philosophy person"--used to be a phi
i wrote:
> > Some sort of abstraction is needed if you believe that the macroeconomy
> > is more than the sum of its parts. The measure of aggregate demand is an
> > abstraction, but without it one is stuck with a pre-Keynesian vision of
> > the world (which basically saw the macroeconomy as the m
Jim Devine wrote,
> Some sort of abstraction is needed if you believe that the macroeconomy
> is more than the sum of its parts. The measure of aggregate demand is an
> abstraction, but without it one is stuck with a pre-Keynesian vision of
> the world (which basically saw the macroeconomy as the
Christian wrote:
>As for PC [the Phillips Curve], Jim said its empirical data waiting for a
>theory. Certainly. But it's not treated as such, generally--least of all
>by people like Greenspan and Co., who treat it as a full blown theory that
>needs to be disproved...
Frankly, I think that once
> If there would be a philosophy or literature person here, s(he) would
> *really* be pissed, not only by the unprofessional use of language but
> also by ignorance. I am not a big fun of hermeneutics and deconstruction
> either, but I never make the mistake of considering those theorists
> writ
I wrote:
> > But when real GDP grows quickly (and unemployment falls), that represents a
> > _general_ increase in aggregate demand.
Tom Walker writes:
>Aggregate demand is a reification. An increase in the aggregate of demand
>would, except by a fluke, also change the relative weights of demand
At 01:25 PM 6/7/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Robert Leeson has shown that Phillips' work lay dormant until Samuelson
>and Solow popularized it is a way to give a the Democratic presidential
>campaign cover to show that Keynesian-inspired Democratic policies would
>not create runaway inflation.
That m
Robert Leeson has shown that Phillips' work lay dormant until Samuelson and
Solow popularized it is a way to give a the Democratic presidential campaign
cover to show that Keynesian-inspired Democratic policies would not create
runaway inflation. I think the reference can be found in Leeson. Robe
Jim Devine wrote,
> But when real GDP grows quickly (and unemployment falls), that represents a
> _general_ increase in aggregate demand.
Aggregate demand is a reification. An increase in the aggregate of demand
would, except by a fluke, also change the relative weights of demand for
different c
Mine,
I am actually a "philosophy person"--used to be a philosophy professor before I was a
lawyer. Although I do not necessary share the vehemence of the rejection of (the very
different, as you remark) approaches of deconstruction or hermeneutics, I am fairly
suspicious of their value when
I wrote:
> > I'm not sure what that has to do with literary criticism (which is
> basically supposed to help us understand the fiction we read).<
Tom Walker writes:
>I wish I could remember who it was who referred to Marx as an heir to the
>intellectual tradition of Swabian Pietism.
wasn't it
[Tom Walker's] theory: bottlenecks not tides
>Inflation happens because industries have discrete requirements for
specific kinds of labour and other inputs, not continuous requirements for
generalized inputs. <
But when real GDP grows quickly (and unemployment falls), that represents a
_gene
>I'm not sure what that has to do with literary criticism (which is
>basically supposed to help us understand the fiction we read). It is true
>that the meaning of a theory varies with context, but that says we have
>to
>be very clear by what _we_ mean by the theory. The sociology or
>psycholo
>
>>References to hermeneutics and deconstruction don't convince me. I've
never
>>been into that kind of lit crit sh*t. I prefer logic, empirical
research,
>>and the philosophy of science (methodology).
If there would be a philosophy or literature person here, s(he) would
*really* be pissed, n
Jim Devine wrote,
> I'm not sure what that has to do with literary criticism (which is
> basically supposed to help us understand the fiction we read).
I wish I could remember who it was who referred to Marx as an heir to the
intellectual tradition of Swabian Pietism. Critical theory refers not
Jim Devine wrote,
> To beat an empirical generalization, you have to show that the data can
> be explained better by another generalization or a different deductive
> theory, i.e., show that the correlation isn't based on any reasonable
> causation that it is instead is an accident which can be e
I wrote:
> >References to hermeneutics and deconstruction don't convince me. I've
> never been into that kind of lit crit sh*t. I prefer logic, empirical
> research, and the philosophy of science (methodology).<
Rob writes:
>Strong words, Jim!
that's what pen-l is for.
>I'd've thought you co
>The only way to beat the PC is by developing a better theory.
>
>>BTW, this is not something I dreamed up by myself. There is a rich
>>literature on it ranging from critical theory to hermeneutics to
>>deconstruction.
>
>References to hermeneutics and deconstruction don't convince me. I've nev
At 04:37 PM 06/06/2000 -0700, you wrote:
>I can't help mentioning an article that I view as the classic statement
>of the moral sentiment underlying NAIRU, J. Laurence Laughlin's "The
>Unions Versus Higher Wages," _Journal of Political Economy_, Vol. 14,
>Issue 3 (March 1906) pages 129-142.
How c
I wrote:
> > In a passage which seems to summarize his message, Tom Walker
> wrote: >>The NAIRU story and the Phillips curve story make sense if one
> assumes that capital's brief is efficiency and labour's is waste.<<
>
> > Tom, that sure seems like you're mixing normative concepts (efficiency)
I had written:
> > > But the positive/normative mix could be very different: it seems to
> me that the NAIRU theory could easily be interpreted as an argument for
> overthrowing capital. "Capitalism requires a reserve army THAT BIG to
> keep it from punishing us with accelerating inflation??"<<
Michael Perelman wrote,
> The timing of this quote is extraordinary, since it comes after the great
> merger wave put an end to much competition. Combinations work for industry;
> not for workers.
It would be petty of me to point out that Laughlin was a paid spokesman
on behalf of the Chicago t
>
> > But the positive/normative mix could be very different: it seems to me
that
> > the NAIRU theory could easily be interpreted as an argument for
> > overthrowing capital. "Capitalism requires a reserve army THAT BIG to
keep
> > it from punishing us with accelerating inflation??"
>
The way th
The timing of this quote is extraordinary, since it comes after the great
merger wave put an end to much competition. Combinations work for industry;
not for workers.
Timework Web wrote:
> 8. "In these days few people realize the grinding, eager, intense, and
> minute competition which goes on
I can't help mentioning an article that I view as the classic statement
of the moral sentiment underlying NAIRU, J. Laurence Laughlin's "The
Unions Versus Higher Wages," _Journal of Political Economy_, Vol. 14,
Issue 3 (March 1906) pages 129-142.
Laughlin's *positive* argument can, I believe, be
Jim Devine wrote,
> In a passage which seems to summarize his message, Tom Walker wrote:
> >The NAIRU story and the Phillips curve story make sense if one assumes
> >that capital's brief is efficiency and labour's is waste.
>
> Tom, that sure seems like you're mixing normative concepts (efficien
In a passage which seems to summarize his message, Tom Walker wrote:
>The NAIRU story and the Phillips curve story make sense if one assumes
>that capital's brief is efficiency and labour's is waste.
Tom, that sure seems like you're mixing normative concepts (efficiency) and
positive concepts (
31 matches
Mail list logo
