It's always a bad situation when one academic point-blank
accuses another of something like "one statement per page
that's either flatly untrue or deeply misleading."
And it's even worse when this accusation is repeated directly
after the accused academic
provided quite a bit of exculpatory evidence, and called the
accusation a "smear."
But the worst is when the two academics are writing for the same
newspaper. And in this case it's the New York Times,
with Paul Krugman going after Steve Levitt for the global warming
chapter in Superfreakonomics.
Something
is wrong here. They can't both be right; one or the other
must have seriously misrepresented someone's views. I'm guessing
that the Times usually holds its columnists to a higher
standard. But I'd hate to be the editor tasked with sorting this
one out.
Welcome to the world of responsible public discourse.
Unlike the Fox Newsopia in which you and your friends have been
trapped for ten years, in the world of newspaper and -- yes --
academic journals, people vigorously disagree and sometimes even
downright (verbally) attack one another. It's all a part of
something we call "the marketplace of ideas."
I think you'll like it here. Now, turn down that radio; switch
off that Beck. You'll sleep better nights not having that
ceaseless and retarded blubbering in your brain anyway.
in_awe| 10.19.09 @ 1:52PM
I know who I'm putting my money on...
Liberal Reader| 10.19.09 @ 11:53PM
Mr Lawler --
Welcome to the world of responsible public discourse.
Unlike the Fox Newsopia in which you and your friends have been trapped for ten years, in the world of newspaper and -- yes -- academic journals, people vigorously disagree and sometimes even downright (verbally) attack one another. It's all a part of something we call "the marketplace of ideas."
I think you'll like it here. Now, turn down that radio; switch off that Beck. You'll sleep better nights not having that ceaseless and retarded blubbering in your brain anyway.
It's morning on the right!