No. It's A Theory of Justice, Dombey and Sun, The Night of the Iguana, and so on. It's just a convention, though... . Judy Evans, Cardiff --- On Fri, 30/9/11, Andy <mimi.erva@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: From: Andy <mimi.erva@xxxxxxxxx> Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Further to Economics Not To: "lit-ideas" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Friday, 30 September, 2011, 12:47 Donal, I agree with everything you say. You're right, we can't just scrap the whole thing. That would make me a nihilist, which I'm anything but. Even if it's leaking, it's all we have. But, fixing it I don't think is possible. I think it's just going to have to run its course and wind up where it winds up. The best we can do is stop the world and get off. I think actually that I'm more and more attracted to primitivism, not because humans are different in a primitive state (all humans, all the time), but because I think the equality that's forced on humans in primitive societies is more civilized than what civilization has offered so far. That's the only way to keep sociopaths in check. I do have a question though. Does the of in Theory Of Justice have to be capitalized? That is going to be my next long night. I'm so proud that I just figured out when to use an adverb and when to use an adjective. This is a hard one though, any help will be appreciated. Andy Playing seriously, but mostly seriously playing From: Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2011 7:06 AM Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Further to Economics Not From: Andy <mimi.erva@xxxxxxxxx> To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, 29 September 2011, 20:12 Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Further to Economics Not >I don't understand your last sentence. I don't quite understand what you don't understand about it. > First comes figuring out that something is wrong, then comes figuring out the alternatives. My points did not deny things may happen in this 'First..then' order; though I suspect it can happen in either order - sometimes it is realising there is an alternative that brings home that "something is wrong" with how things are. My "last sentence" neither denied nor asserted this point about order, which is not a necessary order but a contingent one in my view. My point was that - irrespective of the order - the value of a criticism that "something is wrong" (or is imperfect) may be negligible unless linked to how that "wrong" may be corrected by some alternative (and without the correction involving some greater evil). There may be clearly "something wrong", for example, with some of the inequalities of income in our societies but admitting this is of negligible impact in persuasive terms for making changes, since we need to know for example whether those changes would actually remove the wrong and, if so, whether they do not have negative consequences that outweigh the wrong righted. A famous example in this regard is perhaps Rawl's argument, in his "A Theory Of Justice", to the effect that inequalities of that sort may be 'just' if even the worst-off under that inequality is better-off than they would be if that inequality were removed or lessened. Dilemmas lie at the heart of most social problems and that is why a criticism should address the dilemmas involved and not simply think pointing out a wrong in itself is enough to carry the day on any question of reform. It simply isn't. I am sympathetic to your points about the success of sociopaths in climbing corporate and other organisational ladders, but do not see how this impacts on my "last sentence" either. Donal Indian Summering "Everybody is saying this is a day only the Lord could make" London ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html