It's final exam day here in my world–Critical Thinking is the course. A friend on Face Book posted this article about being a Republican who believed climate change to be a real thing. Actually, the article is about understanding what the claim about climate change entails, in particular the difference between climate and weather. This difference … Continue reading Final Exam
We've all been busy here at the Non Sequitur. But today I had a moment for a short post. Here's Paul Krugman on George Will (via Eschaton): Oh, boy — this George Will column (via Grist) is truly bizarre: So why is America’s “win the future” administration so fixated on railroads, a technology that was … Continue reading Crazy Train
Someone quipped the other day that whatever we do in the wake of Saturday's massacre (not tragedy), we must not consider what might have caused it. And so, George Will: It would be merciful if, when tragedies such as Tucson's occur, there were a moratorium on sociology. But respites from half-baked explanations, often serving political … Continue reading Every effect has a cause, usually
Sometime soon we'll have a post up about the "Hack Thirty" at Salon.com. We were surprised that some made the list (B-list hacks) and that some didn't (Charles Krauthammer? Seriously). For that reason we wondered about the methodology and the meaning, in the end, of the term "hack." One person who didn't make the list … Continue reading The Thirty
I love meta commentary–that's why it's so much fun to read George Will and Charles Krauthammer–that's what they do: they make (usally wrong) observations on the logic of argument. Well, at least someone is doing it. For this reason I was glad to run across a phrase close to our heart here, "nut picking." It appears in … Continue reading Nut Picking
Most of George Will's straw men are hollow men–enemies, usually "liberals" made up out of thin air, and made to hold views that would embarass a member of the communist party. Today we are provided with a rare treat. We can watch, almost in slow motion, the process of George Will-style straw manning. We can see, … Continue reading Strongly implies
We have written something like 155 posts on George Will, most of them criticisms of his arguments. “Why him?” people ask (they really do). If you follow the links to blogs discussing his articles and read the rarely published letters to the editor regarding them, you’ll find three basic types: (1) people who copy the … Continue reading Speaking of hacks
Instead of pointing out the usual collection of arcane reference plus caricature plus straw man plus falsehood plus right wing thing tank evidence that is nearly every non-baseball George Will column, let's marvel at this WWII veteran–speaking in favor of equal rights for gays and lesbians. In case you don't have time to watch … Continue reading Omaha Beach
When you have nothing to say against the actual arguments of your opponent–you know, her facts and inferences–you can always psychologize about her motives. Cue the "you're just saying that because." This, I think, would properly characterize George Will's response to any argument not his own (at least those which he doesn't straw man). Today … Continue reading The Green Hornet
There's a certain laughable cluelessness about George Will. One can seriously wonder whether he really knows that most of his columns advance the shakiest and silliest of arguments. The same is not true of Charles Krauthammer, his arguments advance a fairly malicious brand of sophistry–in particular, the sophistry of wrongly or dishonestly (i.e., by distortion) … Continue reading She blinded me with ethics