Ciao!: I am my own means of production

I am my own means of production

02.15.2005

Turned in my grant proposal; it’s finished. Now I can take a deep breath, and plunge back into statistical analysis of disaggregated electoral data. But not tomorrow, not tomorrow. I need a day to get back into “living” and enjoy myself a bit.

But I’ve come up w/ what I think is a good set of examples (about three dozen) of the six logical fallacies covered so far in 105: accident fallacy, ipse dixit (appeal to authority), circular reasoning, false dilemma, non sequitor (red herring), and poisoning the well. Should be a fun class.

I’ve also not kept up w/ the latest David v. Goliath between the authorities of main stream media (MSM) and bloggers over Easongate. But, to be fair, I do sometimes blog in my pajamas. I had a great conversation w/ Simon yesterday, though, about how internet technology is really changing things, and some people just don’t see it. It may sound foolish, but we are on the verge of a major break in how society is structured.

And I keep wondering whether James Bennett is right. Did capitalism (as defined by Marx) end in the 1990s? The dinosaurs are always the last to see it coming. Which makes me wonder: If industrial capitalism is over, do Marxist critiques retain any relevance (compared to, say, anti-absolutist critiques)? Was Fukuyama right?

Tonight I’ll pre-prep for 345 (the chapter on Central America), and take it very, very easy tomorrow (perhaps install some new statistics software). Then off to WIDR bowling. W/ our good friend Jake, who’s back from Japan for a month.

Plus an impromptu rendezvous w/ D, tonight. We chatted, watched the weather turn back to winter, and did some out-of-office work. Let's hope things continue in this direction.

Posted by Miguel at 10:24 PM

Comments

End of capitalism as we know it? One word: Amway.

Posted by: stephanie at February 16, 2005 02:33 AM

"Red herring" and "non sequitur" are not the same fallacy.

Posted by: Minoux at February 16, 2005 02:08 PM

In a strict sense, you're right. But for the sake of 100-level students, who have a hard time finding a difference between an ad hominem attack and circular reasoning, I simplify it. I use red herring/non sequitor for any kind of fallacy (often actual fallacies, but ones we aren't going to cover in class specifically) as a default (something's wrong here, but I'm not sure what) if there's no other "taught" fallacy they can rely on.

Posted by: Miguel at February 16, 2005 03:41 PM