Who Said It II?

By -
"The materialist doctrine that men are products of circumstances and upbringing, and that, therefore, changed men are products of other circumstances, forgets that it is men that change circumstances, and that the educator himself needs educating."

Comments

  1. Ken B9:40 AM

    Igor Stravinsky.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Gabe Ruth11:20 AM

    My guess was Lewis (not enough flair for Chesterton), but obviously that's not it because that would be boring. It reminded me of this little piece I recently encountered. Haven't been able to get it out of my head for a little while now, or decide what I think of it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ken B12:53 PM

    My guess is Marx, or Lenin.
    My two guesses are Marx, Lenin, or Trotsky.
    Amongst my guesses are Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Engels.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah1:35 PM

      Marx it is.

      Delete
    2. Ken B1:46 PM

      It sounds familiar. Ergo it's from the Manfesto I assume. I haven't read enough other stuff by Marx, with my eyes open at least, to recognize it otherwise.

      Delete
    3. gcallah2:02 PM

      Theses on Feuerbach.

      Delete
    4. Ken B2:57 PM

      Wow. I have no memory of that at all. Of course that could be said for most stuff I read. And yet try as I might I simply cannot forget Dune.

      Delete

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