Comments on: Credibility Seppuku

By: Anono

Anono — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:23:24 +0000

Since Cato has itself worked with scholars who were also associated with the Discovery Institute, Cato has also \”inexplicably decided to surrender any claim to be taken remotely seriously.\” Thus, by extension, Julian Sanchez, as a former employee of Cato, cannot be taken seriously. This leads to a \”all Cretans are liars\” paradox, of course, but no matter which way you look at it, Sanchez doesn\’t appear very bright. Either he\’s not to be taken seriously because he was associated (via Cato) with Discovery Institute personnel, or he\’s not to be taken seriously because he\’s pushing for a silly standard of guilt-by-association-in-the-third-degree.

By: c

Tue, 29 Aug 2006 22:33:20 +0000

Dear Grossed Out,

“Humility” doesn’t mean that we don’t try to discover the facts about the external world—necessarily discarding myths and errors where we find them.

Intellectual “humility,” properly conceived, means that we are brave and honest enough to admit when the facts are inconclusive, either because there are too few of them or we can’t discern which direction they point in.

On some issues our humility is tested while on others it is not.

The question of the literal truth of the Bible is not a case in which the virtue of humility is salient. No intelligent person can believe the literal truth of (one of)The World’s Original Super-Story.

To do so would make one a Young Earth creationist, which is synonymous with idiocy.

I understand your plea for tolerance and open-mindedness and I think it comes from a commendable impulse.

But we should not be so open-minded that our brains fall out.

By: Grossed Out

Grossed Out — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 05:14:22 +0000

While we’re at it, let’s face it…fundamentalist scientists who have nothing better to do than sit in front of their computers, blogging and petting themselves, are pretty full of it too.

Have some humility!

By: eteraz

eteraz — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 23:23:13 +0000

Dear Mr. Sanchez,

Interesting blog you’ve got.

I thought that since you’re at least somewhat clued into the whole democracy promotion thing (even if you hate how Bush is doing it), would you be interested in checking out a dialogue I’ve started with an American Prospect writer.

You may want to get involved, or not.

http://eteraz.wordpress.com/2006/08/27/left-global-cataracts-exemplarism/

Also feel free to check out my reform American-Muslim blog (click on my name above).

By: Jim Harper

Jim Harper — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 18:04:50 +0000

Carefully understated, Julian. Nice work. Bwwaaah!

By: c

Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:51:56 +0000

To lend specificity to the claim of connection, Cato's Richard Rahn is also the Discovery Institute's Richard Rahn. Let's face it, fundamentalist Christianity—and its Jewish, Muslim, Hindu etc. fellow travellers—is a bunch of horseshit. Is it time to purge the libertarian movement of its faith-inspired idiocy? At what point do we just agree that it's a personal issue?

By: Greg Newburn

Greg Newburn — Sun, 27 Aug 2006 20:12:15 +0000

Nevermind, it’s up at TLF now…

By: Greg Newburn

Greg Newburn — Sun, 27 Aug 2006 19:21:10 +0000

I tried to leave this comment over at the TLF blog, but for some reason it didn’t pass moderation.

Anyway, I agree completely with you and Will about DI, but I noticed that Cato links to them as well. Since most of Cato’s readers are probably not trained economists and philosophers, they can’t independently verify Cato’s material, and have to rely on their credibility to take them seriously.

Should we discount the material coming out of Cato because they link to DI?

I think the answer has to be “yes” to be consistent. Hopefully someone over at Cato will recognize that and convince them to remove their link to DI and sever any formal or informal association with those kooks.