This, from Haze, is a bit of fun, though perhaps a bit parochial. Do listen to Tony Blair's impression of the Beast of Blosover: it's hilarious. And the story is resonant. On the day, the best arguments don't always win. I recall seeing a debate at LSE between Alan Sokal, he of the famous hoax, and Bruno Latour (now a visiting Professor at LSE). Sokal was modest, measured, reasoned and failed to impress the mainly undergraduate audience. Latour was absurd, had no serious arguments and played to the gallery. The audience loved him. In this sort of situation honest folk (and I'm not necessarily including Blair in this category) have a hard time prevailing.
Posts
If you wanted to be a top tennis player in the late 1930s, there was a huge
benefit to being a member of ____. Or to being named ____.
-
This post is by Phil. A couple of months ago, this blog had a discussion
that was prompted by the fact that 2 of the top 5 female American tennis
players a...
2 hours ago
No comments:
Post a Comment