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
One thing I've been confused about is what an "open borders" policy would entail. America has no immigration quotas today, so that would seem like open borders to me, but that can't be the case, otherwise we wouldn't be talking about it. So would open borders involve something like zero walls and zero checkpoints, or would it have those but with lax entrance policies?
ReplyDeleteSamson I think you aren't seeing things well since having your eyes plucked out. In his first year in office, the Obama Administration deported more than 200,000 people. (His claim to fame is that the # has dropped each year.)
DeleteSamson I think you aren't seeing things well since having your eyes plucked out. In his first year in office, the Obama Administration deported more than 200,000 people. (His claim to fame is that the # has dropped each year.)
DeleteNo, no, no. I wasn't speaking of deportation quotas. I was speaking of quotas that limit the yearly number of migrants coming in from specified countries. Aside from not mentioning Obama, I was not talking about illegal immigration.
Bad news Gene. I agree almost perfectly. I disagree about what hard line open borders advocates such as Caplan want. Caplan would love to see American culture destroyed.
ReplyDeleteI was trying to be generous, but I suspect you are right.
DeleteHave you seen Bob's response to your article?
ReplyDeletemises.ca/posts/blog/private-property-the-only-real-solution-on-immigration/
It attempts to use a quote from one of your old papers against you.
Believe me, he sent me the link, I think about five seconds after it was published.
DeleteIn bangles the nutrition analogy: the "body" into which immigrants enter is the "body politic." So Bob's suggested solution is like saying: "don't try central planning by you deciding how much to eat! Let each cell decide on it's own!"
Oops, dictating: "he mangles."
DeleteI read Bob's response to your article on immigration. It struck me as "Break the current state down into millions of smaller states.". How that's a solution, I don't know.
ReplyDelete