-
Why in sam hell is a Philo prof debating her students? That's insane. ANd why in Sam Hell is shee even allowing the premise of this argument to take place: you are obviously closer to talking about what the nature of coercsion, it's scope, and context is. If she allows this "debate" to occur it will obviously be nonsense. that's
-
Oh, I was speaking in terms of economics (For example there would be a Kirzner-Misean, right?). What is interesting is tha Rothbard, Menger, and Lachmann (With Lachmann and Rothbard being on opposite poles) tend towards Aristotle - Mises and Weber towards Kant and German Idealism. As for Political theory, I think I am way closer to Mises than Rothbard
-
I was looking through my old laptop and I found these three scraps of thoughts that were by themselves and saved: ‘The endeavors of psychology to dissolve the Ego and to unmask it as an illusion are idle" -Mises " hermeneutics, ‘as a polemical term in contemporary philosophy’, is a name for the attempt to set aside epistemologically
-
1) That's not a "hatred" for the division of labor: that's just a look at typical psychologisms / lefty themes, institutional positive feedback, and narrow paradigm controlling tricks like alienation and "hyper specialization" lefties like to use . There is stil some vision of the division of labor in their heads (you still
-
One of those movies that is better than the book: the book has chaptrs dedicated to flat out moralizing (still a great book though) here is the context the book was written: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_Bowl
-
1) I'd like to point out that my "hatred" of "the left" is kind of academic. I am mostly concerned, being a man who has been around it kind of a lot, the extremes and the margins of things - aswell as the how ideas sort of take over someone and push them towards filling a certain role and expectation you can see comming from
-
@Kakugo: I'll probably add more later, but I am short on tim: and I thnk this topic is a HUGE topic that is rather difficult to focus one's thoughts on. 1) I think one of the 1st things that have to be distinguished is how the left =/= socialism (where are the differences): in this it may be fine to note that all radical political expressions
-
Wow, that's odd I stumbled across a book that's officially of interest to "Austrian" types. I had no idea Mises wrote the intro, and the copy of this book was a very old copy. I thought I came across an obscure goldmine that I wouldnt be able to see again. Kind of funny this is a Mises Institute book (the person who owned the book
-
Almost forgot positive suggestions For Free: I think MIT offers free online resources / courses / that's something to look into For Pay: http://www.amazon.com/Twelve-Great-Philosophers-Historical-Introduction/dp/1880157543 This was my 101, and it was good enough for a 101. It helps with names, the categories you have to get used to (so it helps
-
OK, let's see if I can ask some good questions: What is the lefts relationship with: -Science (Herbert Marcuse vs Karl Marx vs Michel Foucault vs Paul Krugman, etc): how do these groups feed into eachother and how do they form a united front. When is it "pro science" when is it "anti science" - how do both of these positions