I do think that Powerline post is wtf?, but not because that quoted passage is so incomprehensible, but because the whole post totally mischaracterizes what Jon Chait wrote: "Starting with that questionable but hardly indefensible proposition, Chait ends up embracing a definition that equates political anger with the strong belief that a politician or party is seriously misguided."
But Chait's whole point is that Bush supporters are deceptively using the word "angry" as a proxy to imply something both about their ideology and derangement level; he's arguing against conflating strong Bush disapproval with either anger (though a lot of people are angry, yeah, and with reason), or a specific ideology. Chait never said what "political anger" was because he thinks the whole concept as used by Republicans is a bogus tactic to dimiss opponents, and he did in fact acknowledge the emotional component of what a lot of people feel about Bush (with the word "passion"). Jeez, it's like they can't read.
Also, I've concluded upon rereading the Powerline post that I guess they mean that it's in the transcript that Chait "ends up embracing a definition that equates political anger with the strong belief that a politician or party is seriously misguided," but that's not Chait's point either, from skimming the transcript. He's saying there are a million different ways to charaterize "anger," and by a definition that a strongly held belief that bad things are happening is anger, everyone is angry, and that's the only way you can characterize H. Clinton as angry. By a definition that holds that some kind of emotional demonstration is a necessary condition for anger, she's not.
Okay, so it's silly to be expending energy arguing with this, but that's what you bloggers are offering up today.
On the other hand, their post makes me think that they live in some weird Poweline Batcave, boning up on the philosophy of mind in order to bring the battle to the evildoers. "Wait, John! I've got it! We can use Lewis's discussion of mad pain and Martian pain to show that Harry Reid hates America!"
"Almost all of us hunters have been peppered with shot at one time or another. Mostly it's inconsequential and the wind plays a big part. But I will say this: lots of us have quit a hunt when we realize that the next guy is an idiot. And this, too: knowing what I think I know about Cheney, there is no one in North America who I'd rather hunt with."
I once took a class called Philosophy of Psychology. It was really good, despite not being anything like what was described in the course selection packet. FL or Weiner, do you know the prof? He seemed like a good guy.
Hey are you guys talking about Washington University in St. Louis, which is the alma mater of my pater and my frater, and where I lived in graduate student housing during the 4th year of my life? Well are ya?
Seriously, why is it that intellectually aspirational right wingers are so invested in nonsensical pseudo-science bullshit and convoluted prose that fails to convey anything?
And could that have anything to do with the liberal dominance of the academy, do you think?
This is just more 'conservatives think! liberals feel.' nonsense. But I hope he can get a tuition refund: 'no emotion can be defined solely in terms of a belief' oddly doesn't entail that belief and emotion are conceptually separate.
This shouldn't be a hard concept. I believe this political party is misguided. If their misguided policies are promulgated, my life will be less desirable/harmed/etc. Anger is not an unwarranted response to a threat. Political anger.
You'll have to try much harder to get me to read teh Powerline or teh Hewitt. You didn't even promise there was more incomprehensible crap if I clicked. I need at least a good tease.
But, really, it would likely have to promise something other than tell-me-what-I-already-know. Some largely new form of gibberish would have to be on offer, unless it were a very slow day indeed.
You gotta put the Powerline down and back away slowly... seriously. You're only hurting yourself with this rambunctious behavior.
Posted by arthegall | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 8:37 AM
I do think that Powerline post is wtf?, but not because that quoted passage is so incomprehensible, but because the whole post totally mischaracterizes what Jon Chait wrote: "Starting with that questionable but hardly indefensible proposition, Chait ends up embracing a definition that equates political anger with the strong belief that a politician or party is seriously misguided."
But Chait's whole point is that Bush supporters are deceptively using the word "angry" as a proxy to imply something both about their ideology and derangement level; he's arguing against conflating strong Bush disapproval with either anger (though a lot of people are angry, yeah, and with reason), or a specific ideology. Chait never said what "political anger" was because he thinks the whole concept as used by Republicans is a bogus tactic to dimiss opponents, and he did in fact acknowledge the emotional component of what a lot of people feel about Bush (with the word "passion"). Jeez, it's like they can't read.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 9:04 AM
Chait never said what "political anger" was because he thinks the whole concept as used by Republicans is a bogus tactic to dimiss opponents
But they also use it stoke their supporters—see "angry white men" ca. 1994, where anger mapped onto righteous indignation.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 9:17 AM
I don't know what my point was, other than that Republicans like to have it both ways, and have so far generally succeeded.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 9:18 AM
Wait, I thought "angry white men" was how Democrats characterized Republicans. I'm confused.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 9:20 AM
My evidence is anecdotal, but some Republican-voting fellows of a certain temperment did latch onto and self-identify with the AWM label.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 9:24 AM
Happy white men are effectively homeless.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 9:25 AM
Well, in fairness, emotions aren't beliefs.
Posted by FL | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 9:25 AM
Also, I've concluded upon rereading the Powerline post that I guess they mean that it's in the transcript that Chait "ends up embracing a definition that equates political anger with the strong belief that a politician or party is seriously misguided," but that's not Chait's point either, from skimming the transcript. He's saying there are a million different ways to charaterize "anger," and by a definition that a strongly held belief that bad things are happening is anger, everyone is angry, and that's the only way you can characterize H. Clinton as angry. By a definition that holds that some kind of emotional demonstration is a necessary condition for anger, she's not.
Okay, so it's silly to be expending energy arguing with this, but that's what you bloggers are offering up today.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 9:27 AM
On the other hand, their post makes me think that they live in some weird Poweline Batcave, boning up on the philosophy of mind in order to bring the battle to the evildoers. "Wait, John! I've got it! We can use Lewis's discussion of mad pain and Martian pain to show that Harry Reid hates America!"
Posted by FL | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 9:30 AM
8: Right. But JC really didn't characterize them that way. He's saying you have to think a belief is an emotion to say HC is angry.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 9:31 AM
"Powerline Batcave"...
Back in the day, we used to call it AD.
Posted by Anonymous | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 9:37 AM
apparently assrocketry is genetic:
"Almost all of us hunters have been peppered with shot at one time or another. Mostly it's inconsequential and the wind plays a big part. But I will say this: lots of us have quit a hunt when we realize that the next guy is an idiot. And this, too: knowing what I think I know about Cheney, there is no one in North America who I'd rather hunt with."
Posted by Anonymous | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 10:01 AM
I once took a class called Philosophy of Psychology. It was really good, despite not being anything like what was described in the course selection packet. FL or Weiner, do you know the prof? He seemed like a good guy.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 10:04 AM
Yeah, he seems like a good guy, and pretty damn smart too.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 10:06 AM
True, Weiner, but the hair. The hair.
Posted by FL | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 10:23 AM
Someone once told me that the Wash U-associated philosophers' hair changes color in sync, even when they're geographically separated.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 10:28 AM
He was the only one I recall seeing with green hair.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 10:44 AM
17: Is this some sort of quantum phenomenon?
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 10:45 AM
It was compared to fireflies blinking in sync, in some way that I didn't quite follow, because let's face it I know beans about biology.
I also believe it was a flight of fancy more than anything that was actually in any way true.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 10:47 AM
Wash U-bies seem like they'd be a lot more likely to make bio jokes than physics jokes, anyway.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 10:48 AM
Perhaps I shouldn't have responded to the joke in 17 as if it were serious.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 10:52 AM
I should've pointed out that you didn't see the others because they were geographically separated.
No I shouldn't have. Teh l4m3.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 10:57 AM
Hey are you guys talking about Washington University in St. Louis, which is the alma mater of my pater and my frater, and where I lived in graduate student housing during the 4th year of my life? Well are ya?
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 11:18 AM
Wash-U is Wash-U. The other one is U-Dub. It's too bad b-wo didn't matriculate at either.
The best name—ever—is Simon's Rock College of Bard.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 11:22 AM
Fireflies and synchronicity.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 11:29 AM
The best name—ever—is Simon's Rock College of Bard.
Agreed. Though I understand Rock is not actually studied there, at least formally.
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 11:51 AM
Seriously, why is it that intellectually aspirational right wingers are so invested in nonsensical pseudo-science bullshit and convoluted prose that fails to convey anything?
And could that have anything to do with the liberal dominance of the academy, do you think?
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 2:28 PM
This is just more 'conservatives think! liberals feel.' nonsense. But I hope he can get a tuition refund: 'no emotion can be defined solely in terms of a belief' oddly doesn't entail that belief and emotion are conceptually separate.
This shouldn't be a hard concept. I believe this political party is misguided. If their misguided policies are promulgated, my life will be less desirable/harmed/etc. Anger is not an unwarranted response to a threat. Political anger.
Let's hope they don't discover Singer.
(Prinz is teh s1ck.)
Posted by Cala | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 3:25 PM
You'll have to try much harder to get me to read teh Powerline or teh Hewitt. You didn't even promise there was more incomprehensible crap if I clicked. I need at least a good tease.
But, really, it would likely have to promise something other than tell-me-what-I-already-know. Some largely new form of gibberish would have to be on offer, unless it were a very slow day indeed.
Posted by Gary Farber | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 7:54 PM
knowing what I think I know about Cheney, there is no one in North America who I'd rather hunt with."
knowing what I think I know about Ted Kennedy, there is no one in North America who I'd rather ride shotgun with.
Posted by ogmb | Link to this comment | 02-15-06 9:15 PM