Quotation du jour

On CNN, Paul Begala just called Barack Obama “Change Incarnate.” Catholic philosopher Francis Beckwith asks: “What’s next? A Chalcedonian formulation of Obama’s 2 natures?” (Hat tip to Jeff Miller.)

My answer: more likely, a Monophysite formulation.

5 Responses

  1. Is change a substance, nature, or artifact?

  2. Name one politician who hasn’t sought elective office by promising change. Obama reminds me of Perot. He tells us what’s wrong, or what he thinks is wrong, insists he’s just the man to fix it, yet never gets around to telling us how he plans to do it. You can find a dozen guys in any bar at happy hour acting the same way.

  3. Dim Bulb said: “He tells us what’s wrong, or what he thinks is wrong, insists he’s just the man to fix it, yet never gets around to telling us how he plans to do it.”

    Precisely!

    Ironically, Obama had accused McCain of the very same thing — saying that the Republicans are not saying how they’ll fix the problems that America presently faces; Yet, I found no such “how” elaborated in his or any of the other speeches delivered at the DNC last week!

  4. Perhaps it’s because you didn’t listen.

    The first task is to actually acknowledge what is in front of you. The second is to analyse it. The third is to respond correctly.

    Americans haven’t even gotten to the first point. They can’t, or wont, acknowlege what is in front of them.

    Barack Obama is not who I would necessarily pick as a guide but he does have an inkling of what needs to be acknowledged. That. at least, is more than can be said of his opposition. That is quite an achievement on Barack Obama’s part, considering the incredible effort to deny that there is any real “problem” or difficulty to be had.

    You guys really need to take a biiiiiiig break. Go out into the “real” world and “see” what’s going on.

    Philosophy don’t mean sh*t when the sh*t’s going down.

  5. “Philosophy don’t mean sh*t when the sh*t’s going down.”

    Evagrius,

    I think the original post was intended to be humorous, but ok, I’ll bite.

    I wonder if your comment doesn’t want just a bit of qualification. There’s a sub-discipline of philosophy which deals with practical concerns, how one should behave in the “real” world, when, you know, stuff is “going down.” This is called “ethics.” You do your ethical philosophizing beforehand so when the time comes, you know how you should act, what you should do. Ethically speaking, when the “stuff” is “going down” is precisely when one needs philosophy–one needs to have already done it, and then have the habit of character to live it, as there are often a wide variety of possible responses to a given situation, and not all of them, it stands to reason, will be the morally correct one. We shouldn’t assume that we’re such good people that we always do the right thing by nature. We ought to take some time to do a bit of ethical philosophizing beforehand, perhaps on our downtime, just to make sure we are being straight with ourselves, and prepared to act morally in the “real” world.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: