tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post1056616611419627738..comments2024-03-28T02:54:46.537-04:00Comments on The TOF Spot: The Rise of Sentiment and the Fall of CivilizationTheOFloinnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14756711106266484327noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-22683144161874840782015-11-15T16:26:18.036-05:002015-11-15T16:26:18.036-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Cantushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09423694187264830935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-59498749835631156252015-11-14T00:35:01.377-05:002015-11-14T00:35:01.377-05:00'frequent weaselry' !!. Bloody marvellous...'frequent weaselry' !!. Bloody marvellous phrase. I will use it as much as I can from now on. ('weaselling out of things is what separates us from the animals - - except the weasel' - Homer Simpson)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-88952093079079873562015-11-05T17:25:48.478-05:002015-11-05T17:25:48.478-05:00Or as Jonah Goldberg put it (paraphrasing), "...<i>Or as Jonah Goldberg put it (paraphrasing), "If I say don't build a bridge, and someone else says build the bridge, we're both 'extremists', but the guy who says only build the bridge halfway across the river is just an idiot." And "If someone says kill all the Jews, and I say don't kill the Jews, the guy who says to kill half the Jews is not more reasonable than both of us."</i><br /><br />In a similar vein, I came across two mathematicians the other day arguing over whether the first integer is 0 or 1. For some reason, neither of them liked my compromise suggestion of 0.5.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-53570416922559720172015-11-02T00:37:31.104-05:002015-11-02T00:37:31.104-05:00The quotes from Edward Feser's post reminded m...The quotes from Edward Feser's post reminded me of the same thing described here:<br />http://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/the-case-against-liberal-compassion/<br />Derekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08826546785644963850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-76412516990213443522015-11-01T01:48:55.434-04:002015-11-01T01:48:55.434-04:00@Anonymous: I said a name, genius, not your real n...@Anonymous: I said <i>a</i> name, genius, not <i>your real</i> name. In the immortal words of Jerry Holkins, "Accountability is crucial ... and a fixed persona makes the laws of a microculture enforceable. But the idea that this persona must bear your <i>actual name</i> to lend it value (for you, or for others) is ludicrous."<br /><br />As for your argument, what argument? <i>Ipse dixit</i> is a logical fallacy.Sophia's Favoritehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02871625814389904112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-55250333769957037772015-11-01T01:33:03.482-04:002015-11-01T01:33:03.482-04:00Well, it must be kept in mind that the phrase &quo...Well, it must be kept in mind that the phrase "it seems to me that" (as it is often used) should be read in light of the Michael Novak article at <i>First Things</i> quoted in the original post, saying that students are now resistant to resolving disagreements by reasoned arguments. In this context, the person is using the phrase in such a way as to signal to any opponents that the matter, as it "seems" to them, is their <i>own</i> truth and reality. Whether there is an <i>objective</i> fact of the matter is not acknowledged, thus rendering the matter closed to rational adjudication. (Indeed, depending on how sensitive the topic under discussion is, anyone who suggests that there is an objective fact of the matter independent of how it "seems" to a particular individual often risks being accused of impoliteness, incivility, and intolerance.)<br /><br />On the other hand, if someone uses the phrase "it seems to me that" in a discussion as way of offering one's tentative opinion, but either implicitly or explicitly acknowledges that there is an objective fact of the matter that we are trying to get at, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. The problem is that the phrase is sometimes not used in that way; rather, it's used as a way of <i>precluding</i> rational adjudication of the matter by relocating truth into the one's own subjective beliefs. Truth is no longer defined by whether my beliefs and opinions actually correspond to objective reality; instead, truth becomes a mere assertion of the will. I actually just came across an internet poster that said: "My truth may not be the same as your truth."<br /><br />Ideally, the phrase "it seems to me that" would be the <i>beginning</i> of a discussion in which we reason together, hopefully getting closer to the truth as we go (Plato's dialogues are all like this). But, in the worst cases, the phrase is just a way of <i>ending</i> discussion, signaling to any potential interlocutor that this is the person's own truth and reality, equally valid as any other, and therefore not open to rational adjudication.jmhenryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10108615537455993311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-44121736652974447392015-10-31T21:37:32.772-04:002015-10-31T21:37:32.772-04:00Sophia has a point, if you're going to advise ...Sophia has a point, if you're going to advise speakers to adopt a posture that invokes such a sure and forceful, even challenging manner, at pain of losing one's masculinity, then be consistent enough to personally stand by your words in a public forum, pick a recognizable handle as Illion has, anything less suggests you'd rather not be identified with such advice personally, for whatever reason.<br /><br />Can you tell me why using "It seems to me" need invoke such an uncharitable psychoanalyzation? I interpret it simply another way of say something like "from what I've seen so far..." or "near as I can tell,..." none of which follows from incompetence or a lack of familiarity with the subject at hand. It may include a degree of uncertainty or suggest reduced confidence, but this may follow simply from the nature of the matter spoken of. Could you please explain how expressing uncertainty in speech need imply a weak mind and will? Is it because using "it seems.." might provoke a "why?" from listeners? Talonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05200852355967804488noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-22205689300618596732015-10-31T18:08:11.146-04:002015-10-31T18:08:11.146-04:00... or an academic (which is often much the same t...... or an academic (which is often much the same thing).Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-83273763639193304862015-10-31T14:53:42.300-04:002015-10-31T14:53:42.300-04:00Oh, and "Sophia's Favorite" is the n...Oh, and "Sophia's Favorite" is the name on your birth certificate, I gather. Right. Interesting how you don't answer the substance of my comment, but instead call me a coward. Name calling in an attempt to disqualify without addressing the merits of the argument. How like a woman. In any event, I wasn't pontificating on manliness but on how to express a statement in a conversation. I stand by my comment and will add that women as well as men shouldn't say "it seems to me," because its evidences a weak mind and will. But when a man shows such weakness, he is rightly called a pussy. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-29933953954121299712015-10-31T12:18:47.383-04:002015-10-31T12:18:47.383-04:00Your pontificating on manliness is made starkly ir...Your pontificating on manliness is made starkly ironic by your pusillanimous refusal to so much as write in a name at the end of your comment.Sophia's Favoritehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02871625814389904112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-22130841654031023062015-10-31T10:10:23.491-04:002015-10-31T10:10:23.491-04:00Any man who uses "it seems to me" is a p...Any man who uses "it seems to me" <i>is</i> a pussy, plain and simple. The manly mode is to say, when one is uncertain, "I speak under correction, but this is how the matter stands." In other words, you state your position but make it clear that you are open to being persuaded or taught by someone with greater knowledge. If you cannot speak that directly, you should keep your mouth closed. You don't know enough to make it worth hearing your view of the matter. When a man says "it seems to me" he is not contributing to the substance of the conversation. Like a woman, he just wants to hear himself speak and be accepted by the group. It is a social signal and a plea for the others not to contradict him. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-50317016131839275432015-10-30T20:07:31.691-04:002015-10-30T20:07:31.691-04:00Ah, that makes more sense; I think we are in agree...Ah, that makes more sense; I think we are in agreement on this point. Indeed, a "synthesis" of seeming "extremes" is one of Chesterton's major themes, e.g. "Here you can swagger and there you can grovel." He ties it into the paradox of "Very God and very man", in the nature of Christ (using the double meanings of the word "very", which already had its modern meaning in his day but which was still occasionally used in its original sense of "true"). Sophia's Favoritehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02871625814389904112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-25454318151186706672015-10-30T19:34:00.592-04:002015-10-30T19:34:00.592-04:00The objection in a Scholastic "question"...The objection in a Scholastic "question" is always wrong, though. Aquinas says "it seems" with the implication "but it is not so".<br /><br />I know, which is why my are mixed on using such language.<br /><br />And Chesterton wouldn't have cared about "extremes"<br /><br />I probably used the wrong term. I'm referring to Chesterton's ability to point out that two sides of a debate are both based on the same false premise(s), like the puritans vs. libertines, or the capitalists vs. the socialists, and that the right premises often are either a mean between the two views, or just transcends both (with two eyes, one doesn't just see left or right, but also depth).<br /><br />f I say don't build a bridge, and someone else says build the bridge, we're both 'extremists', but the guy who says only build the bridge halfway across the river is just an idiot." And "If someone says kill all the Jews, and I say don't kill the Jews, the guy who says to kill half the Jews is not more reasonable than both of us."<br /><br />I think the difference between Chesterton's way and this other one is that the man Goldberg is describing is simply trying to synthesize (which I would rather call compromise) two views, while Chesterton is trying to synthesize the both aspects of truth mixed with the falsehood in each view. As such, Chesterton is appealing to another standard that transcends both views, which he calls common sense. Chesterton is a philosopher, while the other man is a politician. Or at least that is my take on it :-)<br /><br />I completely agree with Goldberg, BTW.<br /><br />Christi pax.Daniel D. D.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-60523945399498602452015-10-29T17:02:43.796-04:002015-10-29T17:02:43.796-04:00PS. You are correct, though, that people should sp...PS. You are correct, though, that people should speak of many more things as probable, rather than certain, than they do.Sophia's Favoritehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02871625814389904112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-35943518975450244512015-10-29T17:00:57.228-04:002015-10-29T17:00:57.228-04:00@Daniel D. D.: The objection in a Scholastic "...@Daniel D. D.: The objection in a Scholastic "question" is always <i>wrong</i>, though. Aquinas says "it seems" with the implication "but it is not so".<br /><br />And Chesterton wouldn't have cared about "extremes". E.g., "People have begun to be terrified of an improvement merely because it is complete. They call it utopian and revolutionary that anyone should really have his own way, or anything be really done, and done with. Compromise used to mean that half a loaf was better than no bread. Among modern statesmen it really seems to mean that half a loaf is better than a whole loaf."<br /><br />Or as Jonah Goldberg put it (paraphrasing), "If I say don't build a bridge, and someone else says build the bridge, we're both 'extremists', but the guy who says only build the bridge halfway across the river is just an idiot." And "If someone says kill all the Jews, and I say don't kill the Jews, the guy who says to kill half the Jews is not more reasonable than both of us."Sophia's Favoritehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02871625814389904112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-75857591956264810242015-10-29T11:58:34.579-04:002015-10-29T11:58:34.579-04:00Part of the (present) difficulty with the "it...Part of the (present) difficulty with the "it seems to me" formation is that quite often when people use it, they're using it in an intellectually dishonest manner. What I mean is that they're *saying* "it seems to me", but *meaning* "this is how it is" -- and <i>then</i>, when questioned for reasoning to back up the assertion that they are actually intending others to accept as settled truth, they'll fall back to claiming they were "just expressing an opinion" (*). Yet, when those others disregard it as being "just an opinion" (*), they tend to go back to asserting it (and frequently, angrily).<br /><br />Whatever diffidence "it seems to me" implies in its literal meaning <i>seems</i> all but overwhelmed by the frequent weaselry to which it is put.<br /><br /><br /><br />(*) let's not even start on the misuse of that word.Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-10060686730239033632015-10-29T10:03:06.942-04:002015-10-29T10:03:06.942-04:00I'm not sure what to think of such things. St....I'm not sure what to think of such things. St. Thomas uses the term "videtur" to (correct me if I'm wrong) describe his objections, which has a similar meaning to " it seems."<br /><br />The philosopher in me wants to choose the middle ground: we should speak with certainty on things we are certain, and with probability on things that we are not (its interesting that those who cry about people speaking of moral and religious truths as certain, tend to speak of scientific theories with a certainty they do not process).<br /><br />Don't worry about pleasing both sides, or any sides. Someone with Chesterton's philosophy woukd point out that both sides are at an extreme. Also, both the Jewish "side" and the Roman faction were not pleased with Christ.<br /><br />Christi pax.Daniel D. D.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-47236982325228653682015-10-28T17:31:30.044-04:002015-10-28T17:31:30.044-04:00"It seems to me that..."
I use this all..."It seems to me that..."<br /><br />I use this all the time. I don't know what I would do without it. I don't like to make statements that I'm not certain of without clearly adverting my lack of certainty. When I am certain, I state things plainly; but when I'm not, I say "it seems to me that..." because I don't want to end up having said something as if it were certain, and turn out to be wrong. I want people to know that on this particular issue, though I have an opinion, I regard my opinion as merely probable.<br /><br />So I get called a pussy by right wing straight-talkers for it. And yet, leftists always tell me I'm arrogant and extrude an intolerable odor of smug certainty whenever I open my mouth.<br /><br />I know no one can please everyone, but I can't seem to please anyone.Edward Isaacshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15178867205047028725noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-51676034795706535452015-10-27T22:14:40.337-04:002015-10-27T22:14:40.337-04:00So true.So true.Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-34050082168073050342015-10-27T18:54:35.587-04:002015-10-27T18:54:35.587-04:00Better a grammar Nazi than an illiteracy anarchist...Better a grammar Nazi than an illiteracy anarchist! :pAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-60282613787888383172015-10-27T17:52:39.263-04:002015-10-27T17:52:39.263-04:00I think emotivism is just the most articulate exam...I think emotivism is just the most articulate example of the phenomenon in question.Sophia's Favoritehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02871625814389904112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-76930459609109224092015-10-27T16:29:14.321-04:002015-10-27T16:29:14.321-04:00So, does "emotivism" develop out of this...So, does "emotivism" develop out of this or is it the other way around?<br />Elostirionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00311603783690801367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-28948583449364151112015-10-27T14:43:19.864-04:002015-10-27T14:43:19.864-04:00Women had the franchise in the great age of the me...Women had the franchise in the great age of the medieval university.Sophia's Favoritehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02871625814389904112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-69721408962856502172015-10-27T14:32:19.153-04:002015-10-27T14:32:19.153-04:00It would, indeed, you "grammar Nazi!" ;)...It would, indeed, you "grammar Nazi!" ;)Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-447603865959500290.post-88656612983929674402015-10-27T13:53:54.480-04:002015-10-27T13:53:54.480-04:00"With Photo's from 1945 to 1998"
I ..."With Photo's from 1945 to 1998"<br /><br />I suppose it would make someone feel bad to start pointing out misplaced apostrophes.thefederalisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17514099991587503764noreply@blogger.com