Re: Re: Re: Re: Expertise and Vanguard Parties

At 01:30 PM 08/03/2002 -0700, you wrote: >I thought it happens when your wife is a socialist and you actually pay some >attention to what she says. Hmmm. Reminds me of when I used to be married to a Trotskyist. Since he was so busy doing political work and thinking political thoughts, he never h

Re: Re: Re: Expertise and Vanguard Parties

I thought it happens when your wife is a socialist and you actually pay some attention to what she says. Cheers, Ken Hanly - Original Message - From: "Ben Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 2:30 PM Subject: [PEN-L:28907] Re: Re: Expertise and Va

Re: Re: Re: RE: Expertise

Juries are very much the hoi polloi you are so >contemptuous of and yet, according to many, they do a very creditable job. > I have been very impressed with the juries who have served before my judge. jks _ Send and receive Hotmail

Re: Re: Re: Expertise and Vanguard Parties

At 08:55 PM 07/30/2002 +, you wrote: >What part do you reject, Doug? Representative govt? Univeral suffrage? >Extensive civil and political liberties? In fact you reject none of it. >You are a bourg lib too, as are probably 95% of the people on this list. Explain the bourgeois part. Thanks

RE: Re: Re: Re: Expertise and Vanguard Parties

Title: RE: [PEN-L:28899] Re: Re: Re: Expertise and Vanguard Parties Doug writes: >And what about that word "liberal"? It carries with it the now largely forgotten modifier "Manchester," no? An atomized competitive system with no real room for notions of social solid

Re: Re: RE: Expertise

At 08:42 PM 07/30/2002 +, you wrote: >>What do you think of juries? Is this an example of the hoi polloi >>interfering in your area of expertise? >> >>Joanna > > >No. Juries find facts, they don't decide questions of law. Neither I nor >any other lawyer has any expertise in hwta happened in

Re: RE: Re: RE: Expertise

-0700 > >Is the fact that "juries find facts while judges determine the law" set in >a >stone that someone brought down from Mount Sinai? No, but it's a rule of American law. whatever happened to >juries that reject unjust laws? It happens, We don't know about it unless the jurors say somethin

Re: Re: Re: Expertise and Vanguard Parties

Justin Schwartz wrote: >What part do you reject, Doug? Representative govt? Univeral >suffrage? Extensive civil and political liberties? In fact you >reject none of it. You are a bourg lib too, as are probably 95% of >the people on this list. I reject none of it except your label. It's too go

RE: Re: RE: Expertise

Title: RE: [PEN-L:28894] Re: RE: Expertise Is the fact that "juries find facts while judges determine the law" set in a stone that someone brought down from Mount Sinai? whatever happened to juries that reject unjust laws? is it always possible to make a hard-and-fast distinction between the "

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Expertise

> >Yes I do object. With regard to reserach, neither I nor anyone here wants >to be told what to work on. Now, there is some democratization possible in >the decision to fund kinds of projects. The legislature can (and does) >decide to alot a certain amount of funds to, say, cancer research. O

Re: RE: Re: Re: Expertise

Devine, James wrote: >I understand that Windows software doesn't run as well on Macs, too. .

Re: Re: Re: RE: Expertise

Suckers Cheers, Ken Hanly - Original Message - From: ravi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 2:13 PM Subject: [PEN-L:28809] Re: Re: RE: Expertise > > "science does not think" -- martin heidegger > > (thought

RE: Re: RE: Expertise

Title: RE: [PEN-L:28864] Re: RE: Expertise Justin said: >>>There are political technicians--Lydons Johnsons, Dick Morrises, Karl Roves, who are political machers, who can make the system work to attain particular ends. Thoise people need to be used and kept on a short leash.<<< someone asked:

Re: Re: : RE: Expertise

or is >this all just an issue of the advantages and disadvantages of the >division of labour... etc. That's exactly what it is. Truth has nothing to do with it. jks _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.m

RE: Re: Re: Expertise

Title: RE: [PEN-L:28867] Re: Re: Expertise Michael Pollak writes: > >Put a diagnostic disk in your disk drive.  Hopefully one > came with your > >computer.  That should have a DOS system file on it that > will let you boot > >and look around and hopefully see what's wrong.  If it's a hardwar

Re: Re: : RE: Expertise

Ian Murray wrote: > > What is a non-circular justification for laws > forbidding people to consume the chemicals of their choice or > purchase sexual pleasure "in the market" etc. etc. Reporter: What is? KM: (Long Pause) Struggle. Carrol

Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Expertise

> >In a message dated 7/29/02 1:49:29 PM Pacific Daylight Time, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > > Of course, in politics, the main body of "experts" > > >is the revolutionary party guiding society. > > > > > > > > > Gaak. That is exactly where there and can be no expertise, just >politic

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Expertise

- Original Message - From: "Justin Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > if so, is > >that form of truth meaningful in a general context? > > What does that mean? There is one one form of truth, which is, as Aristotle > said long ago, to say of that which is, that it is,a nd that which is

Re: Re: Re: Re: RE: Expertise

> >if i may say something as the resident slow thinker: things are >whizzing by at a good speed on this thread but it seems to me >that certain things are not clear (at least to me!). the examples >and analysis (offered by michael p. and others) seems to touch >upon the dangers of letting experts

Re: Re: Re: RE: Expertise

In a message dated 7/29/02 1:49:29 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > Of course, in politics, the main body of "experts" > >is the revolutionary party guiding society. > > > > > Gaak. That is exactly where there and can be no expertise, just politics. > When will

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Expertise

Title: RE: [PEN-L:28811] Re: RE: Re: RE: Expertise > "Could you please describe in plain English the curtailment > of my liberties?" > > Ian you have the right to remain silent... Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] &  http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine  

Re: Re: Re: RE: Expertise

if i may say something as the resident slow thinker: things are whizzing by at a good speed on this thread but it seems to me that certain things are not clear (at least to me!). the examples and analysis (offered by michael p. and others) seems to touch upon the dangers of letting experts decid

Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: Expertise

- Original Message - From: "Justin Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 2:52 PM Subject: [PEN-L:28819] Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: Expertise > >"Could you please describe in plain English the curtailment of my >

Re: Re: Re: RE: Expertise

Thus I don't think you will be able >to write all laws and contracts in simple English; the effort of protecting >against other lawyers will prevent it if nothing else. Though I'm sure that >it can be done a lot of the time. A lot of law is technical and there are centuries of technical vocabul

Re: Re: RE: Re: RE: Expertise

> >"Could you please describe in plain English the curtailment of my >liberties?" > >Ian The judge asked him what time it was Reuben said, Five to ten, The Judge said, That's exactly what you get --Hurricane (Bob Dylan) Or as we say in Shytown, you all fucked, cuz. jks _

Re: Re: Re: RE: Expertise

- Original Message - From: "Michael Perelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 2:04 PM Subject: [PEN-L:28806] Re: Re: RE: Expertise > I would add one other dimension to the list of problems that Scott > mention: a

Re: Re: Re: RE: Expertise

At 05:13 PM 07/29/2002 -0400, you wrote: >"science does not think" -- martin heidegger > >(thought i would throw that one out and see what kind of fish >it attracts ;-)). > > --ravi Hard to say without context; but normative science is more like a vetted bureaucratic procedure ...hence

Re: Re: RE: Expertise

Justin Schwartz wrote: >> > > Legalese is awful. It's not even English. But there were striitings in > America to make it more like English quite a while ago. The Legal > realists, like Jerome Frank and Thurman Arnold, were quite good writers, > following in the manner of their master Justi

Re: Re: RE: Expertise

"science does not think" -- martin heidegger (thought i would throw that one out and see what kind of fish it attracts ;-)). --ravi

Re: RE: Re: RE: Expertise

RE: [PEN-L:28795] Re: RE: Expertise - Original Message - From: Devine, James To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED] ' Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 1:56 PM Subject: [PEN-L:28804] RE: Re: RE: Expertise Justin writes: >Legalese is awful. It's not even English. But there were striitings i

Re: Re: Re: RE: Expertise

> >I would add one other dimension to the list of problems that Scott >mention: arrogance that often leads to disaster for all concerned, which >is why I mentioned Dr. Lay. > -- > The Greeks had a word for that . . . . jks _ Send a

Re: Re: RE: Expertise

I would add one other dimension to the list of problems that Scott mention: arrogance that often leads to disaster for all concerned, which is why I mentioned Dr. Lay. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Re: RE: Expertise

Title: RE: [PEN-L:28795] Re: RE: Expertise Justin writes: >Legalese is awful. It's not even English. But there were striitings in America to make it more like English quite a while ago. The Legal realists, like Jerome Frank and Thurman Arnold, were quite good writers, following in  the manner

Re: Re: RE: Expertise

Theses on Feuerbach III The materialist doctrine concerning the changing of circumstances and upbringing forgets that circumstances are changed by men and that the educator must himself be educated. This doctrine must, therefore, divide society into two parts, one of which is superior to society

Re: Re: RE: Expertise

Of course, in politics, the main body of "experts" >is the revolutionary party guiding society. > Gaak. That is exactly where there and can be no expertise, just politics. When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn? _ M

Re: Re: Re: RE: Expertise

>Expertise also occurs in some specific context. Today's industrial medicine >means that your doctor has at most 15 minutes to spend figuring out what >your problem is. Because of the current mind/body split ideology, chances >are that your doctor will never touch you (if he/she can help it).

Re: Re: RE: Expertise

At 02:20 PM 07/29/2002 +, you wrote: >Well, we have already established that I am an arrogant, elitist, right >wing tool of the bourgeoisie, no socialist, and a general son of a bitch, >so pay no attention to me. You go find a doctor who knows less than you do >about medicine. I gather that

Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: Expertise

that expertise is sometimes nothing more than the artificial creation of hierarchy. On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 05:41:18PM +, Justin Schwartz wrote: > > : Expertise > >Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 10:29:06 -0700 > > > >Writing about expertise, I think that we should recall how Alfred Marshall > >revam

Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: Expertise

: Expertise >Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 10:29:06 -0700 > >Writing about expertise, I think that we should recall how Alfred Marshall >revamped econ. education -- making it more mathematical, even though he >himself rejected the idea that math was useful for economics -- just to >make it more difficul

Re: RE: Re: Re: Expertise

Writing about expertise, I think that we should recall how Alfred Marshall revamped econ. education -- making it more mathematical, even though he himself rejected the idea that math was useful for economics -- just to make it more difficult for outsiders to comment on economic matters. -- Mich

Re: RE: Re: Re: Expertise

It's not I but Shane who is thinking in individualistic terms. My point is precisely that there is some tendency for thesystem to select Rehnquists who don't have to be told what to think. The federal judiciary is of course life-appointed and so more resistant to electoral pressures than many s

RE: Re: Re: Expertise

Title: RE: [PEN-L:28739] Re: Re: Expertise JKS: >Shane thinks that most judges are just tools of the capitalist class who do their bidding. ... Even in the case of Justice Rehnquist, the charge is unfair. He just thinks along their lines.< it's a mistake to think in such individualistic te

RE: Re: Re: Re: Expertise

Title: RE: [PEN-L:28737] Re: Re: Re: Expertise It's important to remember that "expertise" is not a one-dimensional variable. The practical and concrete knowledge of nurses and physician's assistants may be quite different in kind from the more theoretical and journal-ba

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Expertise

His problem wasn't bad advice. The problem of many other people was that they trusted his expertise. On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 02:26:06PM +, Justin Schwartz wrote: > > > > > >Of course, there is expertise, but experts can be very wrong -- especially > >if they go unchallenged. Ask Ken Lay.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Expertise

> >Of course, there is expertise, but experts can be very wrong -- especially >if they go unchallenged. Ask Ken Lay. > His problem wasn't bad expert advice. It was sheer crookedness. Of course there is bad expert advice. You wanna see my stock portfolio? It's a testament to bad expert advice

Re: Re: Re: Expertise

>From: "Justin Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >As to Carl's remark, why is it unjust to have expert judges (in the legal >system) who are empowered to definitively resolve disputes by entering >enforceable orders? Surely you are not one of those people who believe that >we can get along withou

Re: Re: Re: Re: Expertise

Of course, there is expertise, but experts can be very wrong -- especially if they go unchallenged. Ask Ken Lay. On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 04:50:35AM +, Justin Schwartz wrote: > > > > > >The point of the book was that the orderlies and the like spend more time > >with the patient than the do

Re: Re: Re: Expertise

> >The point of the book was that the orderlies and the like spend more time >with the patient than the doctor and thus have valuable insight into the >appropriate treatment. > Oh, I've read the book. And while in Columbus my "doctor" for practical purposes was a physician's assistant, very ab

Re: Re: Re: Expertise

The point of the book was that the orderlies and the like spend more time with the patient than the doctor and thus have valuable insight into the appropriate treatment. On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 12:53:19AM +, Justin Schwartz wrote: >All the same, don't you think that when > the decision has