This blog consists of comments from my real blog, http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/, which I don't want to publish there.
Plus some other stuff convenient to place here.
And its becoming a convenient place for me to dump my comments on other blogs so I can find them again.
> Liberals find conservatives deficient in compassion and tolerance and conservatives find liberals deficient in some other stuff You know, or can invent, the "liberal" position. But you are too deficient too know, or (it would appear) even to care, what "conservatives" think.
We're getting fairly close to not being able to talk to each other, which would be a shame. Recall that this started from your "Liberals find conservatives deficient in compassion and tolerance and conservatives find liberals deficient in some other stuff". I'm still trying to tell you that you're finding it hard to understand, or perhaps to care, what C's think about L's. > Kirk... is fond of citing that old fascist, Plato You mean like http://capitalistimperialis... ? I'm not familiar with K. https://en.wikipedia.org/wi... contains no ref to P. P isn't particularly in favour of pederasty any more than was common back then. Slavery wasn't uncommon then and was supported by many other than P. P's major faults are elsewhere; principally as you now note, that he was a fascist.
You'll have to wait for my take on Burke, but he's now on my list (available at https://constitution.org/eb..., it looks like). > Plato himself was both bold and radical Popper would I think disagree with you, and I feel inclined to follow him. He describes Plato as reactionary, not radical; and indeed that's a large point of TOSAIE part 1. I'd really recommend reading that if you haven't; it is very good. Recall that only slightly earlier you called Plato an old fascist. Of course fascists can be bold and radical, though B&R is usually used as a compliment. Would you call Mussolini B&R? > most great advances in human history have stemmed from radical ideas That's very close to a tautology. > legally forbidden but ubiquitous Worth dwelling on. Because it's part of the Paine/Burke dichotomy, as well as part of the Con/Lib one. You don't change a people instantly by changing their laws. Law is custom. That's what Kirk was trying to tell you.