[FRIAM] Trumps motives not judiciable because they are "in his head"

[glen]

Very nice! I never know whether you're arguing against or agreeing with me. The ambiguity is delicious.

The problem with action is _causa prima_, I guess. Since the thread is about one's locus of control, and has turned to the *depth* of one's intra-head gymnastics (being close or far from facts/outside world) and fidelity, your distance-from-application point follows right along.

Although I have a lot of criticism for "coherence theories of truth", I do spend some time trying to reconcile apparently contradictory ideas. And I can't help but wonder why someone wouldn't at least try to imagine how some bit of seemingly unactionable research might be put to good use ... before complaining how unactionable it is out loud anyway.

On January 31, 2020 11:56:13 AM PST, Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com> wrote:
>  "Catholic" vs "Protestant" Ethics
>  https://www.econlib.org/archives/2012/04/catholic_versus.html  >
>
>The thought that I cannot resist is of former colleagues that would
>sneer at uninteresting or insufficiently-cool research.
>Insufficiently-cool research is research that could not possibly result
>in useful artifacts (or even taken decisions) because that engineering
>is for the little people to sort out.   No, _truly_ cool research about
>the strivers' social fabric.   Laugh.  I never realized I had such
>strong feelings about Catholics!   :-)

-- 
glen