tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post5382586962752564969..comments2024-03-28T03:16:14.104-04:00Comments on Noahpinion: Some nonfiction books I really likeNoah Smithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09093917601641588575noreply@blogger.comBlogger77125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-25296989005846748242014-11-22T15:57:01.094-05:002014-11-22T15:57:01.094-05:00Shame on you, Noah Smith, for trying to sic mommy ...Shame on you, Noah Smith, for trying to sic mommy media on Robin Hanson.ACnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-6445734500757707932014-11-22T12:30:44.798-05:002014-11-22T12:30:44.798-05:00It's always amusing to ask people why they bel...It's always amusing to ask people why they believe that all population groups are genetically identical on all socially important traits, when those groups so obviously differ on so many others.<br /><br />In the end, it's obvious that it is a matter of religion, and nothing else.<br /><br />Do they really think they won't look ridiculous in the future, when genomic studies show beyond a shadow of a doubt what anyone but a fool would have realized earlier?candid_observernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-22348279345272595452014-11-22T12:06:28.904-05:002014-11-22T12:06:28.904-05:00If one labors under the nearly psychotic delusion ...If one labors under the nearly psychotic delusion that all population groups are genetically exactly alike on all socially important traits -- which is really only credible if one disbelieves in evolution -- then the world view of GGS is about the only one that might make sense.<br /><br />That GGS is nonetheless laughable is the reductio of the religious dogma it assumes.candid_observernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-91383789076254548102014-11-22T11:54:54.526-05:002014-11-22T11:54:54.526-05:00I'm amazed at the people who think the term &q...I'm amazed at the people who think the term "Charles 'Bell Curve' Murray" actually serves as some kind of argument.candid_observernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-73548036655106639702014-11-21T19:40:18.677-05:002014-11-21T19:40:18.677-05:00Cultural anthropologists hate Diamond because smar...Cultural anthropologists hate Diamond because smart people like Noah read Diamond and almost nobody reads cultural anthropologists anymore (which is sad, but they brought it on themselves).Steve Sailerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11920109042402850214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-89989079377261444602014-11-20T23:21:41.265-05:002014-11-20T23:21:41.265-05:00I take it you've read The Enigma of Japanese P...I take it you've read The Enigma of Japanese Power? Dan Lazare in his very <br />interesting book about the role of constitutions references TEOJP. Though<br />mainly he recounts a very illuminating comparison on the origins of<br />the German and Japanese constitutions after WWII (a very different<br />path in the two countries) and the consequences. Overall, I highly<br />recommend FR.Wallflyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03852136998154262919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-60072788395263884702014-11-20T12:14:11.382-05:002014-11-20T12:14:11.382-05:00So you agree that you are. And, that is why you d...So you agree that you are. And, that is why you do not want to use your name and butt yourself into others dialog.<br /><br />Pop your pills and butt out.KVnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-52736958342470808362014-11-20T11:36:24.507-05:002014-11-20T11:36:24.507-05:00I think this critique and that in the Guardian mis...I think this critique and that in the Guardian misses and talks past the points Diamond was trying to make. This quote from the Guardian article reverses or at least misstates Diamond’s premises and goal in GGS. <br />“The very premise of Guns, Germs and Steel is that a hierarchy of progress exists in the realm of culture, with measures of success that are exclusively material and technological; the fascinating intellectual challenge is to determine just why the west ended up on top.”<br />It has been years since I read GGS, but I think it is pretty clearly a work of history and geography, and not a work of social anthropology. I think I am paraphrasing Diamond’s explicit statement of his goal by saying that he was trying to identify and trace at the broadest geographical level and over the longest time frames the MATERIAL factors that explain in an historical sense what made the differences that allowed the “winners” to win and the “losers” to lose. My recollection is that GGS seeks strenuously to avoid the types of invidious comparisons between cultures that Spencer and others championed, and this was precisely a key factor that made GGS a pathbreaking work of general and popular history. <br />Beyond this, this comment and the Guardian article suffer from the familiar tension and jealousy that arises among specialists when someone writes a best seller that draws on the research of the field. The Guardian review pooh-pooh’s Diamond as follows:<br />“Advanced civilisations arose where the environment allowed for plant domestication, leading to the generation of surplus and population growth, which in turn led to political centralisation and social stratification. No surprises there.”<br />Well, I as a general reader who had not been previously exposed to the plant domestication research found this very surprising and interesting. I recall also Diamond’s argument that Cortez and Pizzaro’s victories over the native American cultures, at the broadest material level, drew on the accidental factor that material progress was easier in the Old World because communication occurred on an east west rather than north south axis. This meant that the transmission of agricultural innovation in the Old World was easier because the innovations could spread in broadly similar temperature zones, whereas transmission north and south in different climate zones. A trivial point perhaps, but illustrative of what Diamond was trying to do. <br />TK Texasnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-47226010872157053412014-11-20T07:10:16.308-05:002014-11-20T07:10:16.308-05:00That's not a denial, KV.That's not a denial, KV.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-58594583232382653622014-11-19T14:23:48.063-05:002014-11-19T14:23:48.063-05:00I just lost a long comment by failure to understan...I just lost a long comment by failure to understand WordPress, but want to thank you for calling attention to Suvarov. I read the Chief Culprit and must say it presents a very convincing account and argument relative to Hitler barely beating Stalin to the punch in launching a surprise attack. It offers a very significant change in perspective for me on the origins of WWII. Thanks for the leadTK Texasnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-19874708907482683362014-11-19T10:30:52.380-05:002014-11-19T10:30:52.380-05:00You are. Otherwise, you would use your name or in...You are. Otherwise, you would use your name or initials. Also, when I make general comment, it is not addressed; all my comments are addressed to Noah. You should refrain from butting in with bs alias. Noah is grown up and if he wants to respond, he is more than capable. Or butt out.KVnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-24426339748375683172014-11-19T08:45:12.714-05:002014-11-19T08:45:12.714-05:00Online Watch Movies Free
http://www.solutionsstyle...Online Watch Movies Free<br />http://www.solutionsstyle.com/Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04942315881021206422noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-69584620728999752802014-11-19T04:47:44.052-05:002014-11-19T04:47:44.052-05:00KV, are you on drugs?KV, are you on drugs?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-38569832358202548822014-11-17T16:53:44.768-05:002014-11-17T16:53:44.768-05:00Noah,
Do you recall that article at your blog on ...Noah,<br /><br />Do you recall that article at your blog on depression you wrote? I think you are going back there; you are scattered beyond your comprehension. Just get of the horse for a while and simply focus on the important stuff; stuff that really counts, like teaching and mentoring students and writing something original. While I am at it, also get off the Japanese kick; they have evolved from the same genetic stock the rest of the world has, and they are capable of doing all that you think they are not. <br /><br />You should have also read Darwin and Dawkins - everything they wrote.KVnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-9964286239374840492014-11-17T02:15:49.221-05:002014-11-17T02:15:49.221-05:00Noah, A bit touchy? I can understand after your d...Noah, A bit touchy? I can understand after your discourse with those Anons.<br /><br />Only If you had really read and comprehended the impact of knowing the longitude in traversing the oceans. <br /><br />Honestly, you are trying to do too many things and fucking yourself. Time to focus on what you really want to be and write a book on a subject.<br /><br />Finally, with the language and pure flair of hate you expressed I would rate you as Z----- to infinity.KVnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-64465749952593112562014-11-16T18:46:42.544-05:002014-11-16T18:46:42.544-05:00Adam Tooze - "The Wages of Destruction."...Adam Tooze - "The Wages of Destruction." How to really mess up an economy and destroy your own country and several others, all at once.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-81820808578964108152014-11-16T12:11:43.051-05:002014-11-16T12:11:43.051-05:00I have two recommendations:
On the upside, I.F. S...I have two recommendations:<br /><br />On the upside, I.F. Stone's 'The Trial of Socrates,' is a rather sublime account of the origins of democratic government. For me it opened up the jewels of ancient Greek culture as well as exposing Plato & Socrates as anti-democratic snobs.<br /><br />On the downside, I think every American should read Gaeton Fonzi's, 'The Last Investigation.' A rosetta stone, in my view, for the political malaise American culture finds itself in.mattskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07936264188400397646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-54984043249445113092014-11-15T19:51:51.038-05:002014-11-15T19:51:51.038-05:00"http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jan/09..."http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jan/09/history-society"<br /><br />Wow. So a shallow analysis with no references is a "good example of someone writing about the problems in Diamond's work"?<br /><br />The 2nd reference is mildly interesting, and at least has references. The 3rd reference is again shallow and unsupported.<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11304146622068183941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-80658903080327854692014-11-15T12:24:56.067-05:002014-11-15T12:24:56.067-05:00Also note: I think in general it is good to be ver...Also note: I think in general it is good to be very suspicious of "big think" history. For various reasons I think such endeavors are nigh impossible (owing to the amount of specialized information you'd need to synthesize) and at best they just end up being about the priors of whoever's writing them. See Victor David Hanson for a particularly nefarious version thereof, where his big take on history is little more than "white supremacy." Jeff Daleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04977452043197135317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-73448111909836041892014-11-15T11:44:25.099-05:002014-11-15T11:44:25.099-05:00There are detailed critiques of Diamond out there....There are detailed critiques of Diamond out there. I sense one problem is that he's so cavalier about areas outside of his own expertise that the relevant experts are just left shrugging and saying "Just... no." Jeff Daleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04977452043197135317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-78198296983475238832014-11-15T11:41:09.338-05:002014-11-15T11:41:09.338-05:00Jared Diamond leading this list is pretty troublin...Jared Diamond leading this list is pretty troubling. Among academics he's got a pretty poor reputation; not so much in his own limited field but in terms of the general sloppiness of his popular works. Here is good summary paragraph written by a friend of mine that sort of provide a survey of what's wrong with his approach:<br /><br />"Diamond is the "neutral tone/liberal friendly" rendition of the once-fashionable Whig history "Why The West Keeps Winning" school of thought. Well, fashionable among conservatives. In any case, that is why the Hanson reviewer I cited above thinks VD and Diamond are so compatible: they each provide one another with patches for the gaping holes in their version of the relative inevitability of what they view as white, Western dominance (it is, after all, the framing for his "why do the whites have the cargo" opening story). This dominance is so powerful that it must necessarily work the same way backwards through history, nevermind China or whatever."<br /><br />The main problem is that he's got only a superficial understanding of scholarship outside his field but he doesn't let that stop him from making sweeping assertions. And because he's only got a limited understanding and he's quick on the gun his assertions end up being nonsense. There's no shortage of good writing picking apart Diamonds' books in detail. <br /><br />Here is a good example of someone writing about the problems in Diamond's work: http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/jan/09/history-society<br /><br />Another detailed look at what's wrong with Diamond's approach: http://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/2bv2yf/guns_germs_and_steel_chapter_3_collision_at/<br /><br />A journal article that provides a decent survey (link is on a personal website): http://louisproyect.org/2014/10/26/fuck-jared-diamond/<br /><br />In general if you're hungry for the kind of analysis Jared Diamond does but you want someone who's going to be more careful about integrating various disciplines and is also generally aware of the limitations of his understanding, you could do a lot worse than Mann's 1491. Jeff Daleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04977452043197135317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-29793295498495590972014-11-15T11:34:05.701-05:002014-11-15T11:34:05.701-05:00You really shouldn't!You really shouldn't! Jeff Daleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04977452043197135317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-39296734658668931622014-11-15T08:44:22.958-05:002014-11-15T08:44:22.958-05:00This guy preaches a great personal economics
http...This guy preaches a great personal economics<br /><br /><a rel="nofollow">http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/02/22/getting-rich-from-zero-to-hero-in-one-blog-post/</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-49237655650253481912014-11-15T04:50:38.964-05:002014-11-15T04:50:38.964-05:00(original Anon here)
"Not just that, but non...(original Anon here)<br /><br />"Not just that, but non-Westerners are doing better and better!"<br /><br />Most of it is coming from China and other countries that don't exactly cherish Anglo-style capitalism or the economic ideology I'm specifically critiquing here, but yeah, sure, the world is doing reasonably well. BUT this doesn't mean we at home can't do far better than we are, and keep in mind that there is one big caveat to all of this: the environment is currently facing a gigantic (possibly existential, for us anyway) crisis that everyone in the world shares, even the people who haven't gotten rich or even reached middle income yet. This crisis is pretty directly tied to capitalism historically. You don't have to be huge on Naomi Klein to see that status quo economic ideology and political difficulties in restraining carbon emissions go hand in hand either.<br /><br />So all of this growth might turn out to have been completely unsustainable in the end. There was that study that showed that we've literally killed half the animals on the planet in the last 40 years. Will that be our legacy? "Things weren't so bad, a lot of poor people around the world did ok historically speaking and we only destroyed the environment to get there" isn't what I want as humanity's epitaph.<br /><br />"It might, but that just means rich-country people have been spoiled to expect perpetual rises in living standards."<br /><br />I don't necessarily expect that, and I don't think that's where the anger today is coming from either (honestly, it smacks of elitist condescension - "the foolish proles are spoiled!"). Eventually humanity would have to get used to some steady-state economic situation, after all, unless we go the science fiction route and start harvesting galaxies. My problem is that the top 0.1% has about as much wealth as the bottom 90% and they're only capturing more. In other words it's a question of fundamental fairness, of shared prosperity (or shared stagnation, whatever the case may be). The rich have rigged the system in every way imaginable (are you following the AIG bailout trial Noah? Some great facts coming out of that one that weren't written anywhere by Andrew Ross Sorkin, like the fact that AIG seems to have been used as a money laundering vehicle to prop up Goldman Sachs et al.) and are looting society. The fact that most of the remainder of the population might currently, CURRENTLY be stagnating as opposed to actively losing out in absolute terms does not make me feel better about that.<br /><br />Bill Gross got $300M in bonuses in 2013 for making an idiotic and catastrophic bet on interest rates rising. The average pensioner would be lucky to have $300k to last them 15 or 20 years of retirement. Something is horribly, horribly wrong, and while it's great that Chinese labourers are seeing their wages rise, that doesn't imply that the constellation of economic ideas at home should be left alone. Why would it?<br /><br />The tl;dr is that I'm not fundamentally a believer in capitalism on philosophical grounds but if it can be made to be environmentally sustainable and reasonably equitable (think something like a "Green New Deal") than I won't protest too much. The problem is that it's nowhere the former and increasingly less of the latter in much of the West, and that's a recipe for disaster no matter how much "global inequality" improves.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17232051.post-6130008450457054022014-11-14T18:18:05.502-05:002014-11-14T18:18:05.502-05:00I'm amazed at the people who take Charles '...I'm amazed at the people who take Charles 'Bell Curve' Murray as trustworthy. <br /><br />Barry DeCiccohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04735814736387033844noreply@blogger.com