tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post5908476023892052717..comments2024-02-29T03:34:23.190-05:00Comments on Who Were the Sea Peoples?: And Neither Does "Cause," Used in the Scientific Sense, Have a Place in History Propergcallahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-77158703131334980252011-10-23T15:04:04.572-04:002011-10-23T15:04:04.572-04:00Ah, well, that changes everything, Ryan. Even thou...Ah, well, that changes everything, Ryan. Even though you have never done a lick of historical work or trained with any historians, you can back your opinion up by citing someone who never did a lick of historical work or trained with any historians.gcallahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-49759741991309897422011-10-23T01:23:50.866-04:002011-10-23T01:23:50.866-04:00Of course there's such a thing as history- it&...Of course there's such a thing as history- it's a matter of whether what we call history right now is in any way true. You're given me a quote and made fun of my sources, but you've give me no reason not to believe Karl Popper's interpretation of history in The Poverty of Historicism.Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18341935691462262579noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-36396422156520497402011-10-22T21:03:34.012-04:002011-10-22T21:03:34.012-04:00Well, Ryan, you are simply displaying your ignoran...Well, Ryan, you are simply displaying your ignorance of what history is and how robust its methods are. Once again, I will note that I *could* teach you this, but not if you continue to simply plug your ears and sing "There's no such thing as history!"gcallahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-80023900529184381382011-10-22T18:59:21.972-04:002011-10-22T18:59:21.972-04:00I am reminded of something former-baseball-writer-...I am reminded of something former-baseball-writer-now-political-blogger Nate Silver once said: (Paraphrasing) It is certainly true that what a baseball player ate for breakfast will have an effect on his performance later that night.<br /><br /><br />But how big this effect is, or whether one can point to a bourbon, coffee, and red bull breakfast to explain a given four strikeout performance, is outside the realm of human understanding. What we can do in baseball is see the partial effects of a power hitting lineup or a strikeout throwing pitching staff and determine how many wins can be explained by them. Then there is an error term. But historical narratives of (for instance) the 2011 Boston Red Sox or 2007 New York Mets are journalistic nonsense. Is there stuff that is not captured in statistics? Absolutely. Is the world ordered in such a way that we can weigh various bits of historical evidence and determine the "best" narrative of why events transpired as they transpired? Absolutely not.<br /><br />I'm not sure if I've adequately responded to the quotation. I'm not well-read at all in Oakeshott, so I may be missing the point. Perhaps Oakeshott may not believe this, but my reading of Hayek is that scientific methods breakdown because history is too complicated, you do not retreat to some robust historical methodology, because none exists. You instead retreat to agnosticism on the subject.Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18341935691462262579noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-31073896459219047662011-10-22T13:09:10.436-04:002011-10-22T13:09:10.436-04:00I was trying to imagine what caused Oakeshott to w...I was trying to imagine what caused Oakeshott to write that, and then stopped.Bob Murphyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04001108408649311528noreply@blogger.com