One more comment on Foner and Lincoln

Just to note, unless you think I'm being too hard on Lincoln, he did tell his supporters to go to another antislavery candidate in the 1850s to ensure an antislavery candidate won eventhough it cost him that election.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Responses and some links for my readings of James Baldwin Post 1

My recent reading of James Baldwin has turned into a full-on binge. In order simply to keep up with myself, I'm going to be putting links and thoughts in this blog. The first link below is the YouTube video of the debate between James Baldwin and William F. Buckley, which is a must-see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Tek9h3a5wQ Next are two videos of James Baldwin on Dick Cavett: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWwOi17WHpE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzH5IDnLaBA The next video is an examination of James Baldwin's  No Name in the Street  with Darryl Pinckney: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RW6KwSE4958
Read more

Derek Parfit -- The Final Entry

After a long, tedious, explanation of what is wrong with various versions of "Subjective Theories", without really dealing with what I would call the 'real problem', nihilism, he talks about Kant. I have to say that I find actually reading the text unbearable.  So, I'm going back to the summary to see if he gives me an argument I can sink my teeth into. So, after skimming through much more tedium I  violated all canons of what is good and decent by going right to the "conclusions" section! Sigh, and here is what I was treated to: "everyone ought always to do whatever would make things go best."(pg. 74)   Let's read that again: "everyone ought always to do whatever would make things go best."(pg. 74)  I need a 600 page book for this? Here's another gem: "When there is only one set of principles that everyone could rationally will to be universal laws, these are the only principles, we can argue, that no one could re...
Read more

I Am a Strange Loop -- Commentary on Chapter 7

   In Chapter 7, Hofstadter embarks on some of his central notions, most central of all is the concept of the "I".  The "I" is a concept that has obsessed philosophers for centuries, especially it seems, the idealists, who  believed that fundamental to reality were conscious perceptions, the physical world being merely a supposition of the self.  The "I" is a transcendental point, a center of perception that itself is not part of empirical world.  The analytic philosopher, Wittgenstein, has a famous drawing of the self not being in the field of perception in his Tractatus Logico Philosophicus -- you should check this book out if you haven't read it.  The "I", even for idealists is not empirically real, but rather is part of a transcendental reality.      For Hofstadter, the self is an epiphenomena, by that he means a phenomena which is the result of many things occuring at more micro levels, having no reality itself.  He rela...
Read more