You Can Now Sleep Again...

By -
...since the professionals have debunked Kevin Carson's attack on capitalism.

Comments

  1. Anonymous11:13 PM

    What makes it even more painful is that two of my debunkers appear to have actually read the book.

    --Kevin Carson (public computer)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob Murphy11:58 AM

    Oh jeez! I can't believe I forgot that you check this blog all the time. Umm, I didn't agree with your book. There, I said it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous3:24 PM

    Well, when someone tries to defend the labor theory of value... well, they desserve what they get.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Kevin Carson2:53 PM

    That's OK, Bob--I didn't expect a symposium issue full of reviews by people who agreed with me. But I do appreciate the fact that you and Roderick Long actually appear to have read the damn book before reviewing it, and bothered to thoughtfully engage the arguments. (No implied commentary on the other reviewers is intended by my omission.)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous3:16 AM

    Here is the eve isk,
    eve online isk is the regular site.
    buy isk we supply the regular service.
    cheap eve isk
    buy eve online isk I hope I can help you.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more