Here.
-
Ten Years Ago Today in This Blog
–––––––
-
Here.
Dilbert
–––––––
-
To the Editor:
Re “Court Skeptical of Weighing Race in College Entry” (front page, Dec. 10):
You report that “Justice Antonin Scalia said that minority students with inferior academic credentials may be better off at ‘a less advanced school, a slower-track school where they do well.’” He then added, “I don’t think it stands to reason that it’s a good thing for the University of Texas to admit as many blacks as possible.”
We can take care of Donald Trump’s bigoted remarks in the polling booth. But what can we do about those from Justice Scalia?
KEN PORTNOY
Marblehead, Mass.
Note from KBJ: How does it help blacks to put them into positions in which they are bound (or highly likely) to fail? Both Justice Scalia and Ken Portnoy want what's best for blacks. The difference is that Justice Scalia's view is based in reality. Portnoy's view is based in fantasy. I'll leave it to you to decide who is the bigot.
From Today’s New York Times
–––––––
-
Here, in case you're interested, is the Reading List for my spring 2016 Philosophy of Law course. All of the materials are available to the students for free. All but two of the items are available to you for free. Simply click the hyperlinks.
Philosophy of Law
–––––––
-
Live at the London Palladium (1977). Incredible.
-
Victor Davis Hanson nails it.
“An Age of Disbelief”
–––––––
-
Politics, Part 2
–––––––
-
Here.
Ten Years Ago Today in This Blog
–––––––
-
Here.
Dilbert
–––––––
-
This is worth a couple of minutes of your time. Progressives have lost (if they ever had them) three capacities: (1) to engage in careful analysis of difficult and important concepts; (2) to follow complex arguments; and (3) to argue, in the sense of persuading, rationally, those with whom they disagree. The reason for these incapacities, I think, is that progressives are dogmatic. They believe that their beliefs are unquestionably true and that their values are unassailable. If you believe that you are on the side of the angels, why bother analyzing, understanding, or arguing? Anyone who disagrees with you is, by that very fact, either stupid (i.e., unintelligent), ignorant (i.e., uninformed), or bigoted (i.e., malevolent).
As for why progressives are like this, look no further than the domination of academia by leftists. Some progressives have never encountered a living, breathing conservative. Their conception of conservatives is, as a result, cartoonish. I know whereof I speak, because I used to be a progressive. I vividly recall telling my fellow progressives that the only real debate is between liberals and progressives. Conservatives, I said, should be treated like cockroaches and stepped on. Having been both a progressive and a conservative, I can attest that, on average, the latter are far better at analyzing concepts, understanding other people's arguments, and arguing.
Law
–––––––
