[Brendan.clarke]

Happy Christmas professor

[Brendan.clarke]

Ah great

[Brendan.clarke]

My understanding is the MA was an intervention where no intervention was needed. Furthermore it seems that the intervention could even have slowed the revovery of Europe rather than saving it. The supporters of Kensian economics cite the MA as an example of their great theory in its full blossoming glory and yet the fact that the recuperation was already well underway without that intervention makes me wonder why the decision was taken. I understand that, human nature has us all wanting to be right. If a theory becomes popular, we all find ourselves rooting for it. The MA seems to be more than ontellectuals rooting for their school of thought however.

Would I be paranoid in imagining that it was all a well thought out plan rather than just faulty thinking on behalf of those who implemented the act? The MA was surely intervention, debt and inflation all rolled in to one big government expanding package. I wonder ir there is any documented evidence of vested interest. I can argue until Im blue in the mouth with the fans of the Marshall act but wont sway them with logic (in my experience) but a nice quote from one of their own proponents is great for frying their circuits. This I have been able to do in the past by quoting Hoover on his intervention before the new deL and Lincoln on his attitudes to blacks and the slave issue in general when government lovers tell me that the North were the good guys fighting for freedom of blacks and the south were clu clux clanners fighting to keep slaves.

[Brendan.clarke]

ThaNk you for the replies. I shall study and come back if I have any doubts. I actually have the audio book of the politically incorrect guide to American History so will relisten as well as read up. The guy who told me that “the marshall act saved europe” said so in a matter of fact way like it was common knowlege and utterly obvious. A bright guy he is too. This will be interesting.

[Brendan.clarke]

The logic course is very good. i am really enjoying it.

[Brendan.clarke]

I had made almost all the same observations and come to the same conclusions before reading this post. Amusingly enough I am also an English teacher.min my case in Spain. So of course the fact of the adjective modifying the word “men” and “honest” also bothered me. The search for what the speaker is actually attempting to assert is indeed an art for the reasons you stated. The speaker sometimes is not gramatically rigorous and would express one thing in a manner that I would mark as incorrect on a students exam. This puts us in a quandry doesnt it? Shouldnt we depend upon the speaker expressing himself clearly? Doesnt our whole logical game depend upon the speaker clearly defining the terms, the propositions and indeed everything that we are to assess? Otherwise we are throwing a spanner into our logical works. Well that sId… I am only three videos into the logic course so perhaps I can take it easy. I have one of the books from the reading list and am plodding through it in an attempt to grasp it all. Kim still getting the exercises wrong so… Guess Ill repeat the last two classes before going on.

[Brendan.clarke]

Thank you for the reply.

[Brendan.clarke]

Yeah I got tired of it. I started watching it froma “Let’s see the other side of the argument” point of view but the argument seems to be “South = bad because they had slaves” and “North = good because they wanted to free the slaves and live happily ever after” so now I get where they come from I can go back to my reading list. I’m reading “The PIG to the Civil War at the moment”

[Brendan.clarke]

Ha! That’s a quote fron the song with Hayek and Keynes.

[Brendan.clarke]

Just thought Id mention it. You cant talk to some people.

[Brendan.clarke]

Yeah this is great ipod material. I like the course a lot so far.

[Author]

Posts