Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Fri Mar 31 17:19:06 2006 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
----------------- HES POSTING -----------------
Further to Carlyle/Dickens and Levy/Quinn
This is an argument which is implicit in those who stress Carlyle's
"fascist" attitudes,:
1. Carlye believed the anti-slavery movement to be dismal
2. Therefore, Carlyle was no judge of what is dismal.
This is not a deductive argument, but it is an argument. It is an
argument against Carlyle as an authority ; ie an argument for the
worthlessness/irrelevance of Carlyle's thoughts on a topic.
The adversaries of economics can use an argument of the same
structure against economics. Namely,
1. Economist A believes revolting phenomena B to be a good thing
2. Therefore, Economist A is no judge of what is a good thing.
For example,
A = malthus
B = forbidding the feeding of a starving infant from public revenue
Indeed, anti-malthusians argued frequently in this matter.
The value of these arguments (being non-deductive) are obviously
highly contingent. Neverthless, I think they have some force.
There is variant force is still more contingent, but which has a
more
interesting conclusion.
1. Carlye believed the anti-slavery movement to be dismal
2. The anti-slavery movement is good.
3. Therefore, what Carlyle judged to be dismal is actually good.
This an argument for the NEGATIVE authority of Carlyle; ie for the
conclusion that Carlyle's affirmation of any proposition constitutes
evidence for the NEGATION of the proposition he affirmed.
William Coleman
University of Tasmania
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]
|
|
|