...the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life...

Monday, May 1, 2017

So distressing.

Stephens’s column does not engage seriously with either climate science or distributional probability. He uses most of his limited column space to argue anecdotally. That is an approach that makes sense if your highest priority is limited government, and you are attempting to reason backward through the data in a way that makes sense of a policy allowing unlimited dumping of greenhouse-gas emissions into the atmosphere. That is a tic of American conservative-movement thought — the conclusion (small government) is fixed, and the reasoning is tailored to justify the outcome. Nearly all conservatives argue this way...


I got into a FB argument with people I don't even know last night about this very kind of thing. The conclusions are foregone, on both sides, but the stakes couldn't be higher. I don't know what we're supposed to do. And I teach for a living.

No comments: