|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on Jan 14, 2022 14:55:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by tancred on Jan 14, 2022 15:06:09 GMT
I'm in my 7th year of pay cuts as a civil servant. There's quite a few of us. I gave up on the public sector years ago. Other than doctors everyone is underpaid. |
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on Jan 14, 2022 15:07:59 GMT
Hi domjg colin The level of individualism we have today in the West (and which I greatly value btw) is not that common in human history. We evolved to function like wolf packs which is why we're so tribal! (well some of us are  ) I've never seen the idea of universal grammar as a threat to the idea of individual autonomy I have to say, I just saw it as a theory of the origin of human language (which is still a big mystery)I think its generally accepted we evolved as a social 'pack' species - and are not particular adopted to survive in the wild in a solo capacity; in fact being ostracised/exiled from your pack would very probably have meant an early demise. But also the evidence suggest that there has always been friction/conflict between different packs of humans.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2022 15:16:04 GMT
I have always had more sympathy with Hume's conception of morality as a a reflection of the passions; themselves formed by the impressions of sensations. The rationalist view of Kant or Mandeville - that morality is discoverable a priori - is dubious at best. I find that Hutcheson provides the most pertinent rebuttals to the Kantian assertion that goodness is analogous to one’s best interest. I follow the advice by jimjam so I will be very brief. Kant is not rationalist. He tries to make peace between rationalism and empiricism (positivism today) which is not possible - hence his dualism that he tries to connect with the categorical imperative. [Hegel, after reading Adam Smith, finds the solution, which is practical activity, but it is quite marginal in his work. Oddly, in Smith's work it partly derives from reading Rousseau.] Hume denied the existence of causality and hence truth, and was one of the few philosophers who didn't stop at the edge of the cliff of denial of knowledge. However, in one letter he wrote that as a philosopher he didn't believe in truth, as a practical man he knew it existed. Furthermore, there is a sentence in his works in which he withdrew all his theory (unknowingly) - the objectives must be achieved. As to Hutcheson - I have a preference for Shaftesbury. But Hutcheson, even if he was an altruist, is very, very close to Bentham's utilitarian philosophy (philosophy of hypocrisy really) - which seems to be quite dominant in the public. |
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on Jan 14, 2022 15:37:52 GMT
Perhaps should be on the Kickie Ball thread but Gary Neville has joined Labour.
Might help with the finances if he and a few others donate 0.5% of their earnings to the party.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2022 15:40:06 GMT
Picking up on that kind thought of yours, I have arranged for a brand new thread named after your good self. It will be called “Carfrew hosts” and will be based on Monty Python’s Argument Clinic.” You are very welcome! Paul Picking up on that kind thought of yours, thought we might start a kindred spirit thread, for those who can’t find them in the real world. QA Maybe even a party! You’re welcome etc. A lovely idea, ta very much. Meanwhile - just like in Downing Street - but virtual rather than real and expensive - I have arranged an added conference room for your “Carfrew Hosts” thread and look forward to your first, 2 am, lecture: ”Why I have a problem with neo liberalism, ordo liberalism and any other liberalisms, why I don’t like Tony Blair, Gordon Brown or Keir Starmer come to that, for undermining the genuine left wing of the Labour Party - and Jeremy Corbyn in particular - and why, unlike all the liberals on this site, I couldn’t be arsed to vote for him to be PM when I had the opportunity.” (We are expecting a packed house for this early morning event.) Meanwhile, I look forward to our synthesiser/classical guitar duet which I think will attract a wide range of musical enthusiasts. (If they can remember which is the appropriate thread.) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2022 15:41:00 GMT
domjg @" You don't believe in Universal Grammar? Fair enough it's not as popular a theory as it once was" Ah-interesting question. No -I don't. I wouldn't have anyway at the philosophical level. It is all of a piece with a view of humanity which I don't buy. But because I find anything to do with human history and evolution interesting, I did have a look at the idea. I recommend Daniel Everett's " Language-the cultural tool". A brilliant and , I think effective response to Chomsky on Grammar I agree with colin - Chomsky's error comes from following Marr's theory (trying to position language and grammar in the superstructure of the society (so, making a class problem out of it). [Oddly, Stalin's work "Marxism and the Problems of Linguistics" uses the same argument as Colin did  and it is correct.] |
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on Jan 14, 2022 15:50:08 GMT
@laszlo [Oddly, Stalin's work "Marxism and the Problems of Linguistics" uses the same argument as Colin did  and it is correct.]Kindred spirits? |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,387
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Jan 14, 2022 15:50:50 GMT
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,710
Member is Online
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Jan 14, 2022 15:52:23 GMT
Picking up on that kind thought of yours, thought we might start a kindred spirit thread, for those who can’t find them in the real world. QA Maybe even a party! You’re welcome etc. A lovely idea, ta very much. Meanwhile - just like in Downing Street - but virtual rather than real and expensive - I have arranged an added conference room for your “Carfrew Hosts” thread and look forward to your first, 2 am, lecture: ”Why I have a problem with neo liberalism, ordo liberalism and any other liberalisms, why I don’t like Tony Blair, Gordon Brown or Keir Starmer come to that, for undermining the genuine left wing of the Labour Party - and Jeremy Corbyn in particular - and why, unlike all the liberals on this site, I couldn’t be arsed to vote for him to be PM when I had the opportunity.” (We are expecting a packed house for this early morning event.) Meanwhile, I look forward to our synthesiser/classical guitar duet which I think will attract a wide range of musical enthusiasts. (If they can remember which is the appropriate thread.) Thanks for that, but as usual, your “funnies” rely on misrepresenting the other person. I don’t have a problem with liberalism. I think overall it’s a good thing. I’d suggest you do a lecture, but you don’t seem to be able to contribute much to many actual discussions, instead you just try and hassle from the sidelines. incidentally, regarding your query about the iPad, I recall how you treated me after I gave the info. last time. Regarding your more recent question the other day, about needing computers for some things - at the time, I asked if you had a computer, for that reason, and you said you did. (Although there are possible workarounds for some things). if it does seem a bit odd the guy you spoke to hates Apple stuff, and won’t help you: suggest you consider the possibility he hates you rather than Apple. Anyway, regarding further technical help, technical stuff was recently challenged on the grounds it might put women off. |
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Jan 14, 2022 15:55:29 GMT
Just been reminded that James Slack - he of the No 10 party during national mourning fame - was the Daily Mail political editor who wrote the infamous "Enemies of the People" front page of the Daily Mail.
In that piece, he berated High Court judges as part of the metropolitan elite and "out of touch" noting that one of them was even "openly gay". Their offence was to declare "war on democracy" by ruling that constitutionally the UK Parliament needed to vote to trigger Article 50.
We now seem to have a Brexit elite which is "out of touch'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2022 16:06:05 GMT
Carfrew
Sorry to ruin your theory but you are right about one thing - I HAD a laptop. However it was near to the end of its life and finally gave up. I didn’t replace it as by then I was so used to the iPad, which you kindly advised me on at the time.
So - recording engineer never uses them, nobody in our household has one. Which is why I asked for his advice on buying a cheap second hand one that would do the job and have since bought one.
But, if you have the time, I would very much appreciate your advice on what “is” possible with sound files on an iPad. As I said last time, my most recent recording skills were on cassettes and new technology just leaves me confused by it’s choices and complexity.
Cheers,
Paul
|
|
|
|
Post by robert on Jan 14, 2022 16:13:54 GMT
Robert, My take was that John Major was misunderstood, maybe his fault, but back to basics was about sound money and the like, focusing on peoples concerns etc. It was never a moral crusade but the press presented it as such so that when the Mellor thing and other incidents occurred they used as a tool to beat him with. You may well be correct @jimjam and I certainly wouldn't argue the point with you. I think that your phrase, "but the press presented it as such", is apposite. When has it ever not been like that in the U.K.? And today we have mob rule by social media, as well. I'm not excusing the number 10 drinkies in any way but it has certainly been presented by the media in the worst light possible and I don't for a minute believe that no other MP, or their team, has not enjoyed a quiet snifter together after a long day in the office but when they should not have done. That's not to say two wrongs make a right, because they don't but I bet one or two are quietly thinking, 'There for the Grace of God, go I'. After all, MPs generally think that they are an entitled bunch, don't they? |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Jan 14, 2022 16:14:46 GMT
City comment: Are we seeing the beginnings of Boris Johnson’s high wage economy?
Everywhere you look it seems like pay is going up I'm in my 7th year of pay cuts as a civil servant. There's quite a few of us. Concentrate on building up your pension as compensation. That's what I did and then retired a few months ago! |
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Jan 14, 2022 16:18:56 GMT
You may well be correct @jimjam and I certainly wouldn't argue the point with you. I think that your phrase, "but the press presented it as such", is apposite. When has it ever not been like that in the U.K.? And today we have mob rule by social media, as well. I'm not excusing the number 10 drinkies in any way but it has certainly been presented by the media in the worst light possible and I don't for a minute believe that no other MP, or their team, has not enjoyed a quiet snifter together after a long day in the office but when they should not have done. That's not to say two wrongs make a right, because they don't but I bet one or two are quietly thinking, 'There for the Grace of God, go I'. After all, MPs generally think that they are an entitled bunch, don't they? Look in your heart and ask yourself if you would take such a tolerant view had Corbyn been PM and had been partying with Len Mcclusky and Momentum during lockdown. Would you have been happy if the media had just quietly mentioned his misdemeanours on page 21 and followed it up by saying something like, "but I suppose everybody was at it so no big deal" |
|
|
|
Post by turk on Jan 14, 2022 16:21:53 GMT
100,000 Russian troops poised on Ukraine border, massive cyber attack ,possible preclude to hostilities.Poland warns of war, still at least they wasn’t partying that would be serious.
|
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Jan 14, 2022 16:31:50 GMT
100,000 Russian troops poised on Ukraine border, massive cyber attack ,possible preclude to hostilities.Poland warns of war, still at least they wasn’t partying that would be serious. Dead cat. Won't work. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,638
|
Post by steve on Jan 14, 2022 16:32:15 GMT
turk Because obviously we want a self serving narcissistic incompetent at the helm at a time of international crisis.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2022 16:33:20 GMT
100,000 Russian troops poised on Ukraine border, massive cyber attack ,possible preclude to hostilities.Poland warns of war, still at least they wasn’t partying that would be serious. Titter, titter.... As Barbara just wrote the reactions of people like yourself, had the PM in question not been a Tory, are pretty easy to imagine. it is neither a trivial matter nor in the least funny. |
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on Jan 14, 2022 16:39:01 GMT
Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch, described the situation as a “gross injustice” and said The Met had issued “thousands” of fines for “minor Covid breaches”, adding that it was “incredible” that the “most heavily policed building in the country” hosted parties and yet the Met is “waiting for people in that same building to produce a report before they decide whether to investigate” – She has a point!
|
|
|
|
Post by robert on Jan 14, 2022 16:46:07 GMT
You may well be correct @jimjam and I certainly wouldn't argue the point with you. I think that your phrase, "but the press presented it as such", is apposite. When has it ever not been like that in the U.K.? And today we have mob rule by social media, as well. I'm not excusing the number 10 drinkies in any way but it has certainly been presented by the media in the worst light possible and I don't for a minute believe that no other MP, or their team, has not enjoyed a quiet snifter together after a long day in the office but when they should not have done. That's not to say two wrongs make a right, because they don't but I bet one or two are quietly thinking, 'There for the Grace of God, go I'. After all, MPs generally think that they are an entitled bunch, don't they? Look in your heart and ask yourself if you would take such a tolerant view had Corbyn been PM and had been partying with Len Mcclusky and Momentum during lockdown. Would you have been happy if the media had just quietly mentioned his misdemeanours on page 21 and followed it up by saying something like, "but I suppose everybody was at it so no big deal" Barbara, my main point was that in reality, they are all undoubtedly at it because MPs are an entitled bunch. Someone posted a photo that's appeared of Starmer boozing, which looks just as bad as the No. 10 garden photo. But he's not the target at the moment but his time will come, if he gets to be PM. They build 'em up and then they knock them down. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Jan 14, 2022 16:46:24 GMT
domjg @" You don't believe in Universal Grammar? Fair enough it's not as popular a theory as it once was" Ah-interesting question. No -I don't. I wouldn't have anyway at the philosophical level. It is all of a piece with a view of humanity which I don't buy. But because I find anything to do with human history and evolution interesting, I did have a look at the idea. I recommend Daniel Everett's " Language-the cultural tool". A brilliant and , I think effective response to Chomsky on Grammar I agree with colin - Chomsky's error comes from following Marr's theory (trying to position language and grammar in the superstructure of the society (so, making a class problem out of it). [Oddly, Stalin's work "Marxism and the Problems of Linguistics" uses the same argument as Colin did and it is correct.] @laszlo Universal grammar is increasinly not seem as relevant by linguists as it's no longer needed to explain child language acquisition with a small/limited example input (which was the problem it was supposed to address) and it's not provable but I have to say I never saw it as anything political in any way despite Chomsky's known politics.. and frankly I'm not sure that it is. |
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on Jan 14, 2022 16:53:58 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by tancred on Jan 14, 2022 16:55:24 GMT
100,000 Russian troops poised on Ukraine border, massive cyber attack ,possible preclude to hostilities. Poland warns of war, still at least they wasn’t partying that would be serious. I don't think Putin would dare to invade. He has a lot to lose - anyway, January is not the ideal month to start a war, and 100k troops isn't much. 1M and then I would be worried. |
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Jan 14, 2022 16:58:49 GMT
Barbara, my main point was that in reality, they are all undoubtedly at it because MPs are an entitled bunch. Someone posted a photo that's appeared of Starmer boozing, which looks just as bad as the No. 10 garden photo. But he's not the target at the moment but his time will come, if he gets to be PM. They build 'em up and then they knock them down. You see that's the false equivalence that Tories and ROC people who voted for Johnson are employing. That photo shows Starmer stood up in his office with a small number of other workers, having a beer. A beer - not a party, not a boozy work meeting. That's much closer to the kind of minor transgressions you are claiming everyone was up to and are trying to excuse. Do you think that equates to the - so far - 17 gatherings involving large numbers of staff, leaving dos, Christmas parties, quizzes, garden parties? Seriously you are defending the indefensible and need to give it up. |
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Jan 14, 2022 17:10:06 GMT
Look in your heart and ask yourself if you would take such a tolerant view had Corbyn been PM and had been partying with Len Mcclusky and Momentum during lockdown. Would you have been happy if the media had just quietly mentioned his misdemeanours on page 21 and followed it up by saying something like, "but I suppose everybody was at it so no big deal" Barbara, my main point was that in reality, they are all undoubtedly at it because MPs are an entitled bunch. Someone posted a photo that's appeared of Starmer boozing, which looks just as bad as the No. 10 garden photo. But he's not the target at the moment but his time will come, if he gets to be PM. They build 'em up and then they knock them down. So Starmer apparently having a beer in his constituency office is the equivalent of a 100 invite to a BYOB party in No 10? Or parties on the eve of the DofE's funeral? Really? |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Jan 14, 2022 17:11:33 GMT
Been working hard all day.
Can hardly stand I'm so rat arsed.
Loving this new 'drinking is hard work' vibe.
|
|
|
|
Post by manlad on Jan 14, 2022 17:22:45 GMT
Kant is not rationalist. He tries to make peace between rationalism and empiricism (positivism today) which is not possible - hence his dualism that he tries to connect with the categorical imperative. [Hegel, after reading Adam Smith, finds the solution, which is practical activity, but it is quite marginal in his work. Oddly, in Smith's work it partly derives from reading Rousseau.] Hume denied the existence of causality and hence truth, and was one of the few philosophers who didn't stop at the edge of the cliff of denial of knowledge. However, in one letter he wrote that as a philosopher he didn't believe in truth, as a practical man he knew it existed. Furthermore, there is a sentence in his works in which he withdrew all his theory (unknowingly) - the objectives must be achieved. As to Hutcheson - I have a preference for Shaftesbury. But Hutcheson, even if he was an altruist, is very, very close to Bentham's utilitarian philosophy (philosophy of hypocrisy really) - which seems to be quite dominant in the public. Kant is certainly a rationalist. While he blended rationalism and empiricism this does not undermine his rationalist credentials. Admittedly, I have little time for Kant in this field and find Hume to be the far greater moral philosopher. I haven't found any arguments within Kant's moral philosophy that can't be fairly easily refuted by Hume and Kant himself credits the great Scotsman for awakening him from his "dogmatic slumber". It is regrettable that Hutcheson is seen as a forefather of utilitarianism as his work needn't be interpreted that way though it is undeniable that Bentham, Mill and Sidgwick (among many others) built upon Hutcheson's ideas. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2022 17:24:14 GMT
@laszlo Universal grammar is increasinly not seem as relevant by linguists as it's no longer needed to explain child language acquisition with a small/limited example input (which was the problem it was supposed to address) and it's not provable but I have to say I never saw it as anything political in any way despite Chomsky's known politics.. and frankly I'm not sure that it is. Thanks.The following is just to.add to your argument above (which I agree with except for the very end), domjg It just reminded me to an experiment back in the 1960s (I think - I can look it up later). In Navajo language they use a different verb if the object is long and thin and for those that were shorter or thicker even though the action is the same. So, they did an experiment - there were objects of different shapes and different colours, and they asked kids to group them. Navajo kids group them by shape and English speaking ones by colour. Theory confirmed. Then someone did the same experiment with kids in NY - working class and middle class (we would call them upper middle now). Middle class children group them by shape, working class by colour. Theory? Politics (there were attempts to use both and of course the second experiment wouldn't have happened without politics). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2022 17:27:33 GMT
Barbara, my main point was that in reality, they are all undoubtedly at it because MPs are an entitled bunch. Someone posted a photo that's appeared of Starmer boozing, which looks just as bad as the No. 10 garden photo. But he's not the target at the moment but his time will come, if he gets to be PM. They build 'em up and then they knock them down. So Starmer apparently having a beer in his constituency office is the equivalent of a 100 invite to a BYOB party in No 10? Or parties on the eve of the DofE's funeral? Really? It certainly comes over a a bit weedy doesn’t it? Whataboutery, especially when it sort of equates a major riot to a couple of people squabbling, is a bit embarrassing to read tbh. |
|
) I've never seen the idea of universal grammar as a threat to the idea of individual autonomy I have to say, I just saw it as a theory of the origin of human language (which is still a big mystery)
and it is correct.]
and it is correct.]
