It turns out that the rhetorical preferences of distinguished economist Ken Binmore (UCL) are not confined to blogging, but figure prominently in his new book Natural Justice (OUP), usefully reviewed by Brian Skyrms in the July 8 TLS.
Professor Binmore on Kant: "Could it really be that his claim to fame as a moral philosopher is based merely on his having invented one of the fallacies of the Prisoner's Dilemma before anyone else?"
Professor Binmore on Plato: "...a fascist who thought that we all so need a leader that nobody should even 'get up, move, or wash, or take his meals' without permission! If philosophical scholarship could convert such adolescent authoritarianism into a model of civilised debate, might it not have done the same for Kant's attempts to evade the rules of deductive reasoning?"
Professor Skyrms on Professor Binmore: "If the spiciness of the offering does not put off the reader, there is work to do....[T]his is a very stimulating book."
There is a serious point here, of course, one made long ago by one of my correspondents. You would think professional scholars would be a bit more sturdy, and less prissy, than they often prove to be.
Recent Comments