Stockman Syndrome

Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge relays it superbly.

ADDED: Peter Schiff on Stockman stomping.

April 3, 2013admin 13 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Uncategorized

TAGGED WITH :

13 Responses to this entry

  • vimothy Says:

    OT, and I’m a bit late to the party, but what is Xenosystems take on the Nagel controversy?

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Knee-jerk: sympathetic to the intellectual content of the Darwinian criticism, disgusted by the way it has been socially expressed.

    [Reply]

    vimothy Reply:

    It seems to be a classic piece of Cathedral-style suppression of crimethink. I thought that the conflict was over materialism rather than Darwinism (Nagel is himself a Darwinian), though?

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    I’m relying on superficial information sources on this, so I’m not very confident about it. It certainly looks to me as though his main critics are neo-Darwinists, accusing him of abandoning attachment to naturalistic explanation (you can’t really depart from materialism and remain a Darwinian in good standing).

    vimothy Reply:

    My (limited) understanding is that his critics are Darwinists, but what they are attacking him for is his questioning of the materialist-naturalist explanation of reason and mind in particular.

    Posted on April 3rd, 2013 at 3:53 pm Reply | Quote
  • Thales Says:

    Cop #1: “There’s no way Bernanke can escape this one!”

    Action Hero: “…’Escape’ is not his plan…”

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    That’s really good. Put it into the past tense, and it’s epitaph material.

    [Reply]

    Thales Reply:

    Thanks. BTB, really enjoying Fanged Noumena right now. That essay on Kant should be required reading — I could never appreciate the full how & why he was such a BFD before.

    [Reply]

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    I’m being densed. Which Kant essay, Thales?

    Speaking of books, I just bought the Stockman Deformation book Plus the Chua book!

    Posted on April 3rd, 2013 at 4:47 pm Reply | Quote
  • Thales Says:

    “Kant, Capital and the Prohibition of Incest”

    [Reply]

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    Yeah, strong opener to FN. Lost me in the final third though. (of the essay AND the book).

    [Reply]

    Thales Reply:

    Nick writes at the grad level (refreshingly so, btw), and you have to know all the referents. If you do, it’s like a tidal wave of knowledge.

    [Reply]

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    Oh I know. Just that my math is non-existent, and I think we can all agree that the conclusions of the Kant essay have been left in the past (as he stated).

    Posted on April 7th, 2013 at 2:03 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment