Display:
[Moustache of Understanding Alert]

We Found the W.M.D. | NYTimes.com - Op-Ed Columnist - Thomas Friedman

So, I have a confession and a suggestion. The confession: I go into restaurants these days, look around at the tables often still crowded with young people, and I have this urge to go from table to table and say: "You don't know me, but I have to tell you that you shouldn't be here. You should be saving your money. You should be home eating tuna fish. This financial crisis is so far from over. We are just at the end of the beginning. Please, wrap up that steak in a doggy bag and go home." <...>

This is the real "Code Red." As one banker remarked to me: "We finally found the W.M.D." They were buried in our own backyard -- subprime mortgages and all the derivatives attached to them. <...>

"A great judgment has to be made now as to just how big and bad the situation is," says Jeffrey Garten, the Yale School of Management professor of international finance. "This is a crucial judgment. Do we think that a couple of hundred billion more and couple of bad quarters will take care of this problem, or do we think that despite everything that we have done so far -- despite the $700 billion fund to rescue banks, the lowering of interest rates and the way the Fed has stepped in directly to shore up certain markets -- the bottom is nowhere in sight and we are staring at a deep hole that the entire world could fall into?" <...>

"The biggest mistake Obama could make," added Garten, "is thinking this problem is smaller than it is. On the other hand, there is far less danger in overestimating what will be necessary to solve it."

Conventional wisdom says it's good for a new president to start at the bottom. The only way to go is up. That's true -- unless the bottom falls out before he starts.



Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.
by marco (cowannar at gmail punkt com) on Sun Nov 23rd, 2008 at 07:19:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Thou wouldst mock teh Mustache of Understanding!

Well Suck. On. This.

Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin

by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Sun Nov 23rd, 2008 at 08:58:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Drew J Jones: Well Suck. On. This.

Wow.  Friedman makes a lot of sense when he talks about green jobs and the green economy.  And since I had not seen much writing by him lately regarding Iraq, I thought he had gone contrite.  That video clearly shows otherwise.

Which presents what I call a Heidegger Dilemma.  I know a lot of people think Martin Heidegger was full of shit as a philosopher, but I was drawn to and impressed by a lot of his ideas.  Thus, when I discovered that he had been a Nazi who had not altogether repudiated or explained his involvement with Nazism, I had to ask myself:  "If someone is so fundamentally wrong on such basic moral issues, are all his philosophical thoughts automatically suspect?"

Here, Friedman demonstrates an appalling, almost bestial lack of moral sensibility with respect to the invasion of Iraq.  So what are we to make of his thoughts on greening the economy, which at face value are so rightheaded?

Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.

by marco (cowannar at gmail punkt com) on Sun Nov 23rd, 2008 at 10:11:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Humans are complex, they can have both good and bad ideas. Judge his arguments for the green economy on their merits.  They are not dependent on the accepability of his views about Iraq. To label someone and then reject their views entirely is just lazy and prejudiced. Not only may Heidegger have had some good ideas, even Hitler did - from a major biography, generally critical:


From the start, Hitler had assumed direction of the major strategy of the war.
...
 He then struck against France, invading through the Ardennes rather than through the Low Countries. ... The campaign as a whole was a brilliant success and Hitler could claim the major credit for its overall planning.
...

Allan Bullock: ADOLF HITLER: A STUDY IN TYRANNY

http://www.holocaust-trc.org/wmp07.htm



Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Nov 24th, 2008 at 04:39:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Hmmm. I'm not sure your analogy is entirely on point. The fact that a Nazi might be talented in military strategy does not run counter to our concept of a military strategist in the way that the assertion that a Nazi might be a great philosopher runs counter to our concept of a great philosopher.

I am not saying that we should reject everything that Friedman (or Heidegger) wrote out of hand. But I believe that egregious errors in judgment are fair grounds for approaching an individual's views on any topic with a dose of skepticism.

The fact is that what we're experiencing right now is a top-down disaster. -Paul Krugman

by dvx (dvx.clt ät gmail dotcom) on Mon Nov 24th, 2008 at 05:20:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

  1. Philosophy isn't just a matter of moral judgments - his philosophical arguments might have been as "brilliant" a success as Hitler's early military strategy.

  2. Friedman has made a lot of judgments and has been critical of almost everything else Bush has done. One mistake, even major, doesn't necessarily mean all his other judments will be wrong.

  3. A dose of scepticism is always a good idea - even with people we like and whose judgments so far seem to have been sound - I TRY to be critical of Chomsky - but it's difficult :-)


Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Nov 24th, 2008 at 08:03:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ted Welch: Judge his arguments for the green economy on their merits.

I agree.  This echoes your comment above as well.

Emotionally, however, I still feel uncomfortable when a thinker can be so repugnant ethically on one issue and yet have compelling philosophical ideas on other issues.  Is this what they call "cognitive dissonance"?  But these are feelings, nothing more than feelings.

Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.

by marco (cowannar at gmail punkt com) on Mon Nov 24th, 2008 at 05:47:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Part of the problem is because philosophy is understood both as a general view of life - "my philosophy of life", and an academic discipline. Some aspects of philosophy are quite technical, so it's quite possible to be good at that while having very nasty moral views - just as with, say, a physicist.

Even this guy could appreciate the difference between ideology and philosophical merit:


In 1967 Heidegger had an encounter with the poet Paul Celan, a Jew who had survived concentration camps operated by the Nazis' Romanian allies. While admiring aspects of Heidegger's writings, Celan had long been aware of Heidegger's involvement with National Socialism.

On July 24 Celan gave a reading at the University of Freiburg, attended by Heidegger. Heidegger there presented Celan with a copy of What is Called Thinking?, and invited him to visit him at his hut at Todtnauberg, an invitation which Celan accepted. On July 25 Celan visited Heidegger at his retreat, signing the guestbook and spending some time walking and talking with Heidegger. The details of their conversation are not known, but the meeting was the subject of a subsequent poem by Celan, entitled "Todtnauberg" (dated August 1, 1967).

The enigmatic poem and the encounter have been discussed by numerous writers on Heidegger and Celan, notably Lacoue-Labarthe. A common interpretation of the poem is that it concerns, in part, Celan's wish for Heidegger to apologize for Heidegger's behavior during the Nazi era.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Heidegger



Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Nov 24th, 2008 at 09:28:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Obviously, different areas and schools of philosophy have more or less bearing on morality and ethics than others.  But in the case of Heidegger, at least those of his ideas which interested me, his philosophy had a close bearing on what it means to be and act in the world.  I was concerned that the flaws in his worldview which made him sympathetic to Nazism also might have introduced hidden weaknesses in the philosophical structures he erected upon that same worldview.

If he were a formal logician or an analytical philosopher, I would be far less concerned (though even in those cases I suppose it is conceivable that one might find some connection between his philosophical ideas and his moral sentiments, remote and contrived though it may appear.)

Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.

by marco (cowannar at gmail punkt com) on Mon Nov 24th, 2008 at 10:07:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It all depends what you mean by "Nazism" :-) Not all Nazi party members would have agreed to everything the Nazis did, especially towards the end.


 If, for Heidegger, Nazism is a nihilistic and dehumanizing ideology based in the metaphysics of subjectivity, a modern ideology with which his thought cannot be identified, how should we then understand his most controversial statement from the Introduction to Metaphysics, about the "inner truth and greatness" of National Socialism? (52) First, this statement, made during a lecture delivered in 1935, can be regarded as ironic and as an expression of Heidegger's growing disappointment with actual National Socialism. To assess it properly, we have to consider the context in which it was made. In the context of a totalitarian state, where attitudes of loyalty to the ideology and hostility to its opponents are imposed in a particularly intensive fashion, even a slight criticism of the regime can be subjected to severe punishment. On the other hand, in such a context, any critical allusion or covert criticism becomes transparent to those who keep their ears open. It would then be immediately clear to the attentive audience of Heidegger's lecture that the "inner truth and greatness" of National Socialism did not imply its outward truth and real greatness. They would regard this statement not as a support of the actual Nazi movement but rather as a criticism of it.

...
What follows from these statements is that Heidegger initially associated National Socialism with a movement that would bring Germany back to its "age-old traditions," renew its spiritual strength, and take it away from the heritage of modernity that has been developing since the seventeenth century. (59) Bringing Germany back to its ancient traditions constituted for him the "inner truth and greatness" of this movement. (60) He saw in it an antidote against modernism. However, he was soon disillusioned. Although the Nazis indeed tried to revive German traditions and regarded modernism as a disease, they at the same time engaged in building a totalitarian state and developed an ideology that was philosophically unacceptable to Heidegger. (61) The actual National Socialism, run by people who "were much too limited in their thinking," and with its political violence and book burning, totalitarian control of the vital resources of the state and the racial composition of the people, and politicization of society and mass rallies, was precisely the ideology which he covertly criticized in his writings, along with Americanism and Communism.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb3545/is_2_61/ai_n29399025/pg_7?tag=artBody;col1

The article goes on to suggest it was even more complex than that. It starts by saying:


MARTIN HEIDEGGER IS WIDELY ACKNOWLEDGED to be one of the most original and important philosophers of the twentieth century, while remaining one of the most controversial. His thinking has contributed to such diverse fields as phenomenology, existentialism, hermeneutics, aesthetics, literary criticism, and theology. His critique of traditional metaphysics and his opposition to positivism and technological world domination have been embraced by leading theorists of post-modernity. He influenced such prominent thinkers as Gadamer, Arendt, Habermas, Derrida, Foucault, and Lyotard.


 

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Mon Nov 24th, 2008 at 02:45:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series