"I'd never heard of TJIC until reading about him the last couple of days, and being a Brit and on the other side of the world I'm an "outsider", in more than one sense, and enough so to disqualify me from the intended range of Martin Luther King's words when he wrote "...Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality...", but I say that, in the relevant ethical sense, his delimitation of those remarks to the borders of the United States was wrong: I'm TJIC too."That's my comment here, here, here, and here.
Saturday 22 January 2011
"I'm TJIC"
8 comments:
Comment moderation is now in place, as of April 2012. Rules:
1) Be aware that your right to say what you want is circumscribed by my right of ownership here.
2) Make your comments relevant to the post to which they are attached.
3) Be careful what you presume: always be prepared to evince your point with logic and/or facts.
4) Do not transgress Blogger's rules regarding content, i.e. do not express hatred for other people on account of their ethnicity, age, gender, sexual orientation or nationality.
5) Remember that only the best are prepared to concede, and only the worst are prepared to smear.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
...being a Brit and on the other side of the world I'm an "outsider", in more than one sense, and enough so to disqualify me from the intended range of Martin Luther King's words when he wrote "...Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality...", but I say that, in the relevant ethical sense, his delimitation of those remarks to the borders of the United States was wrong: I'm TJIC too."
ReplyDeleteMike, you're correct, you're only an outsider in the sense of defined national borders, as you note. Ethically, the most relevant sense, you, and I, are TJIC.
That's right - in fact, I dislike admitting I'm a Brit to anyone other than Americans; and that's only because I already think of myself as American - just not in the different coloured passport sense.
ReplyDelete...in fact, I dislike admitting I'm a Brit to anyone other than Americans; and that's only because I already think of myself as American...
ReplyDeleteAdmittedly, it has been some time since I have been in a foreign country, so I have had no real need to state I am an American, but the more important point you make is revealed in the statement "I already think of myself as an American."
It is the idea of being an American which is of importance. That idea includes individual personal responsibility, equality of opportunity, not equality of wealth or material possessions, inalienable rights, and personal liberty.
It is an idea which needs to be resurrected from the dug grave of isms.
"...equality of opportunity, not equality of wealth or material possessions..."
ReplyDeleteI'm an awful quibbler John, so if you lose your temper with me I won't be surprised (!) but I disagree about "equality of opportunity".
Whilst a student in Edinburgh, I once read Matt Cavanagh's book "Against Equality Of Opportunity" in which he argues that the idea behind the phrase is both philosophically and practically incoherent. I found his claim that the phrase "opportunity for all" would better crystallize the sort of moral demand you presumably have in mind very persuasive.
Actually, I just noticed that my review of Cavanagh's book is still up there after all these years! Unfortunately, the only other review of that book on Amazon is an evil little defamatory comment from some idiot calling himself "Big Foot".
ReplyDeleteI'm an awful quibbler John, so if you lose your temper with me I won't be surprised (!) but I disagree about "equality of opportunity".
ReplyDeleteMike, I would rather that you challenge my thoughts, thinking and writing, than simply absorb them. Rigorous quibbling, rationally undertaken, can only strengthen an individual's ability to think, at least if the individual is willing to think and allow themselves to be criticized.
That's twice, in two days, you've had to knock me in the head, so to speak, in attempts to keep me on track. Thanks.
I'll read your review later, and look for Cavanaugh's book, so I can properly evaluate my "equality of opportunity" statement versus the "opportunity for all" statement.
Well the 'review' is very short - just a couple of sentences. If I was to summarize it now from memory, eight years later, I'd say; universal opportunity (i.e. some measure of opportunity for all) is not only more conceptually coherent than any notion of equality of opportunity but it is also consistent with a market economy, whereas any application of the concept of equality to social outcomes can never be so consistent.
ReplyDeleteThe chief value of this sort of philosophy to politicians these days though will more than likely be as rhetorical cannon fodder for presenting whatever new interventionist policy they want to try out.
Which is unfortunate.
Mike, you're correct, the review is very short, so I'm fortunate you expanded on it in your most recent comment.
ReplyDeleteI think it is my lack of formal training, not only in philosophy but other disciplines, which causes me, at times, to be less than rigourous in my thinking and phrasing when I write, but enough self-deprecation.
I agree, and thank you, for "opportunity for all," in your correction to my previous statement "equality of opportunity."
"Opportunity for all" is more "conceptually coherent."
I'll still be keeping my eye out for Cavanaugh's book.