tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3621026.post7756794324458940958..comments2024-03-29T06:05:04.162+01:00Comments on Robert's Stochastic thoughts: Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14455788499385673507noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3621026.post-57234356528995526122007-05-12T04:31:00.000+02:002007-05-12T04:31:00.000+02:00shorter Kleiman:blood is thicker than water, ....m...shorter Kleiman:<BR/><BR/>blood is thicker than water, ....<BR/><BR/>myself<BR/>my family<BR/>my country club<BR/>my sub-division<BR/>my neighborhood<BR/>....<BR/>....<BR/>....<BR/>....<BR/>my country<BR/>my language<BR/>my customs<BR/>my race<BR/>my religion<BR/>my skin color<BR/><BR/>.... is more acceptable than yours .... well, maybe, not quite, but to believe so is axiomatic, and this belief system is perfectly human and acceptable .... at a minimum, we shouldn't fight it .... if you don't construct your policy prescription on this axiom, it is unsound policy .... doomed to fail ....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3621026.post-27437280829747843532007-05-12T04:11:00.000+02:002007-05-12T04:11:00.000+02:00Sorry. I didn't make myself clear. Reciprocity i...Sorry. I didn't make myself clear. Reciprocity isn't the highest form of cooperation; unselfish altruism is nicer. But reciprocity is an important form of cooperation. If you're part of a group whose norms involved doing good things for other members of that group -- a group that embodies collective social capital -- you ought to obey those norms unless the damage to those outside the group is great. No, I'm not confusing positive and normative propositions. The positive proposition here is that cooperation is useful, and communities that share collective social capital enable it. The normative proposition is that it is right to maintain and build those communities, even at the expense of an absolutely universal altruism.Mark Kleimanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07273854901778070873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3621026.post-43839253666480114292007-05-10T19:51:00.000+02:002007-05-10T19:51:00.000+02:00Now, when I ask after the younger, I am thinking o...Now, when I ask after the younger, I am thinking of American moral identifications. Europe strikes me differently, possibly the reverse in terms of more identification by age. But, I have no reasonable explanation.<BR/><BR/>anneAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3621026.post-59841947256091752522007-05-10T19:45:00.000+02:002007-05-10T19:45:00.000+02:00What is puzzling, though possibly moral leadership...What is puzzling, though possibly moral leadership is an issue, is the extent to which there seems to be less sensitivity to moral argument among the younger than I would have expected. I expect that moral identity has to be made tangible, brought to the individual level; an individual sympathy at a time, possibly generalization thereafter. But, there seems to be a curious moral distancing among the younger.<BR/><BR/>anneAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3621026.post-60148631789484935062007-05-10T15:24:00.000+02:002007-05-10T15:24:00.000+02:00Steal the darn drug, get it. Steal the drug. The...Steal the darn drug, get it. Steal the drug. There was a reason Martin Luther King's repeated sermon was on the good Samaritan. A Nigerian student of mine gone to be a professor, teaches the good Samaritan as often as King taught it. Was King not a universalist, the ultimate universalist?<BR/><BR/>anneAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3621026.post-20917635407324966612007-05-10T15:20:00.000+02:002007-05-10T15:20:00.000+02:00Curiously, I remember reading Lawrence Kohlberg wh...Curiously, I remember reading Lawrence Kohlberg when I was young and thinking "I understand." I can understand how to attach a moral and emotional or nurturing sense. I knew for sure whether I would "steal the drug."<BR/><BR/>Later I remember when Kohlberg died, a philosopher who had studied with Kohlberg telling the New York Times that the philosophy of Kohlberg would have to be re-evaluated because Kohlberg had been a suicide. What a moral idiot, the professor.<BR/><BR/>anneAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3621026.post-47668161263494207992007-05-10T15:08:00.000+02:002007-05-10T15:08:00.000+02:00There is after all a distinct difference in a Brad...There is after all a distinct difference in a Brad DeLong or a Mertin Luther King who can argue for a broad principle and never lose sight of the fallen flegling sparrow to be cared for. Icy hearted rationalism does not in the least impress me, even though I understand well that caring for the sparrow can be overly narrowing.<BR/><BR/>The carelessness of a sparrow, any particular sparrow, of the George Masonites leaves them with a pretend morality. Oh, and I would surely tell just this to Alex Tabarrok; not my sort of friend.<BR/><BR/>anneAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3621026.post-29972657701627266352007-05-10T13:53:00.000+02:002007-05-10T13:53:00.000+02:00No; Alex Tabarrok is not the least open-minded but...No; Alex Tabarrok is not the least open-minded but is entirely threatening and scary and I could not imagine ever taking a course with such a person; a person who thinks of people without ever caring for people. Suddenly we have a hero who calls freedom, without the slightest concern for those who would supposedly be free with the call.<BR/><BR/>"Cry Freedom," that I can assure anyone is not what Alex Tabarrok could ever imagine for actual people say for the people of South Africa. Cry freedom, indeed.<BR/><BR/>anneAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com