Comments on: Rules for Radical Thinking http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/ Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made Sun, 27 May 2012 00:43:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: ingrid http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-196024 ingrid Fri, 11 May 2007 10:22:02 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/#comment-196024 harry, no kidding, we have no time to read CT... but I think we've made quite a bit of progress in disentagling what ideal and non-ideal theory is, and what (if anything) are the problems related to it. So if I don't collapse when I get back home, I'll post about it. E.O. Wright's work has been mentioned as a good example of what non-ideal theory is. We seem to have a set of intutions about clear cases of what ideal and non-ideal theory is, but whether we' ve been able to draw the cut convincingly, is another question. TBC... harry, no kidding, we have no time to read CT… but I think we’ve made quite a bit of progress in disentagling what ideal and non-ideal theory is, and what (if anything) are the problems related to it. So if I don’t collapse when I get back home, I’ll post about it.
E.O. Wright’s work has been mentioned as a good example of what non-ideal theory is. We seem to have a set of intutions about clear cases of what ideal and non-ideal theory is, but whether we’ ve been able to draw the cut convincingly, is another question.

TBC…

]]> By: harry b http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-195708 harry b Wed, 09 May 2007 15:19:32 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/#comment-195708 I thought the fact that they were all in one place might help get the word out, ingrid! I thought the fact that they were all in one place might help get the word out, ingrid!

]]> By: ingrid http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-195703 ingrid Wed, 09 May 2007 15:00:00 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/#comment-195703 Alas, a bunch of political philosophers interersted in the question of non-ideal theory (if such a term can be coherently used) is currently gathering in Helsinki to debate issues of the ideal and non-ideal in political theory - you should repost this in a week´s time! :-) Alas, a bunch of political philosophers interersted in the question of non-ideal theory (if such a term can be coherently used) is currently gathering in Helsinki to debate issues of the ideal and non-ideal in political theory – you should repost this in a week´s time! :-)

]]> By: Nat Whilk http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-195700 Nat Whilk Wed, 09 May 2007 14:24:55 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/#comment-195700 One of the reasons these rules seem odd to non social scientists like myself is that many of our dictionaries and thesauri list "achievable" and "viable" as synonyms. One of the reasons these rules seem odd to non social scientists like myself is that many of our dictionaries and thesauri list “achievable” and “viable” as synonyms.

]]> By: Monte Davis http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-195688 Monte Davis Wed, 09 May 2007 12:52:06 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/#comment-195688 I'm ambivalent about "Do not let the problem of achievability dictate the discussion of viability." Not dictate, perhaps -- but surely enter into the discussion sooner or later. If there is no way from here to there, aren't we (shouldn't we be) inclined to invest less in discussing how great it might be there? I’m ambivalent about “Do not let the problem of achievability dictate the discussion of viability.”

Not dictate, perhaps—but surely enter into the discussion sooner or later.

If there is no way from here to there, aren’t we (shouldn’t we be) inclined to invest less in discussing how great it might be there?

]]> By: Slocum http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-195686 Slocum Wed, 09 May 2007 12:16:22 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/#comment-195686 BTW -- should "reversibility" be a criterion as well? Just in case a 'utopian' scheme turns out to be both achievable and viable but otherwise a complete disaster in terms of desirability in ways that were not originally foreseen. BTW —should “reversibility” be a criterion as well? Just in case a ‘utopian’ scheme turns out to be both achievable and viable but otherwise a complete disaster in terms of desirability in ways that were not originally foreseen.

]]> By: Tim Worstall http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-195682 Tim Worstall Wed, 09 May 2007 08:57:38 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/#comment-195682 <strong>Rules for Radical Thinking...</strong> At Crooked Timber, ideas for the rules for Guidelines for Envisioning Real Utopias: 1. Evaluate alternatives in terms of three criteria: desirability, viability, achievability. 2. Do not let the problem of achievability dictate the discussion of viabil... Rules for Radical Thinking…

At Crooked Timber, ideas for the rules for Guidelines for Envisioning Real Utopias: 1. Evaluate alternatives in terms of three criteria: desirability, viability, achievability. 2. Do not let the problem of achievability dictate the discussion of viabil…

]]> By: alphie http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-195680 alphie Wed, 09 May 2007 07:52:09 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/#comment-195680 Imagine India's 300,000,000 peasant farmers suddenly having good paying jobs in the IT sector... Imagine India’s 300,000,000 peasant farmers suddenly having good paying jobs in the IT sector…

]]> By: dearieme http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-195677 dearieme Wed, 09 May 2007 05:59:35 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/#comment-195677 Fair enough, slocum. I suppose really I just object to such ugly, affected English as "Evaluate alternatives in terms of three criteria: desirability, viability, achievability." Serves me right for visiting a blog for Social Science people. Fair enough, slocum. I suppose really I just object to such ugly, affected English as “Evaluate alternatives in terms of three criteria: desirability, viability, achievability.” Serves me right for visiting a blog for Social Science people.

]]> By: harry b http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-195668 harry b Tue, 08 May 2007 23:47:44 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/#comment-195668 It occurs to me after slocum's comment that the non-political philosophers may have been put off commenting by my desire especially to get comment from political philosophers. Comments from everyone else are as welcome as always -- by "especially..." I meant something like "Read it, dammit". It occurs to me after slocum’s comment that the non-political philosophers may have been put off commenting by my desire especially to get comment from political philosophers. Comments from everyone else are as welcome as always—by “especially…” I meant something like “Read it, dammit”.

]]> By: Tracy W http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-195664 Tracy W Tue, 08 May 2007 22:32:39 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/#comment-195664 Interesting that there's no mention of Hayek's _The Road to Serfdom_, though the author seems to pick up on some of the same problems in section 4. Interesting that there’s no mention of Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom, though the author seems to pick up on some of the same problems in section 4.

]]> By: Slocum http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-195662 Slocum Tue, 08 May 2007 21:48:02 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/#comment-195662 <i>If it’s for a British magazine, why say “envisioning” instead of “envisaging”?</i> For the same reason that a billion is a thousand million rather than a million million? <i>Come to that, what does “viability” mean outside biology?</i> Is that really a puzzle? Do we not talk about organizations and systems "thriving" or "failing", "surviving" or "dying"? From a non-political philosopher, it strikes me as a sound, sensible framework for analyzing proposals--especially the identification of winners & losers, tradeoffs, and waystations. I'd think one area where this perspective would be useful would be in considering what to do about universal health insurance in the U.S. We have the advantage of having a number of viable systems as examples (which is not often the case)--but relatively speaking, that's the easy part. The hard part lies in the area of winners & losers, tradeoffs, and waystations. If it’s for a British magazine, why say “envisioning” instead of “envisaging”?

For the same reason that a billion is a thousand million rather than a million million?

Come to that, what does “viability” mean outside biology?

Is that really a puzzle? Do we not talk about organizations and systems “thriving” or “failing”, “surviving” or “dying”?

From a non-political philosopher, it strikes me as a sound, sensible framework for analyzing proposals—especially the identification of winners & losers, tradeoffs, and waystations.

I’d think one area where this perspective would be useful would be in considering what to do about universal health insurance in the U.S. We have the advantage of having a number of viable systems as examples (which is not often the case)—but relatively speaking, that’s the easy part. The hard part lies in the area of winners & losers, tradeoffs, and waystations.

]]> By: dearieme http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-195661 dearieme Tue, 08 May 2007 21:20:45 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/#comment-195661 If it's for a British magazine, why say "envisioning" instead of "envisaging"? Come to that, what does "viability" mean outside biology? If it’s for a British magazine, why say “envisioning” instead of “envisaging”? Come to that, what does “viability” mean outside biology?

]]> By: Kieran Healy http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/comment-page-1/#comment-195659 Kieran Healy Tue, 08 May 2007 20:30:28 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2007/05/08/rules-for-radical-thinking/#comment-195659 6. Profit! I'm sorry. I couldn't help myself. 6. Profit!

I’m sorry. I couldn’t help myself.

]]>