The Nobel Peace Prize

Allow me to get in my own two cents (and yes, I realize I'm rather late to this party) about the EU's receipt of the Peace Prize.

The Peace Prize is awarded by a committee that is selected by Norway's Parliament. Follow that link for some particulars.

It is fitting, then (nay, it is pragmatically compelling) to observe that Norway isn't a member of the EU.

Norway has twice held referenda to determine whether it would join, and in both cases the go-it-alone faction prevailed: 1972 and 1994.

The Peace Prize is apparently justified this year by a simple and seemingly pragmatic tie: Europe hasn't gone to war since the nations thereof became a single economic unit.

That is pretty clearly a post hoc ergo propter hoc argument, and thus a fallacy. Heck, the US hasn't had a civil war since the EU was created either, but even the Nobel Committee doesn't seem to draw that connection. I'll only note as a counter that Norway itself has managed to stay at Peace even without the dubious benefits of membership.

Here is a website put up by the No-to-the-EU forces within Norway. (The English language version thereof.)

Welcome to No

And here is their view on the Nobel Peace Prize this year.

Predictable though it is.

What is going on exactly? My uninformed outsider's guess is that the political elites of Norway want their country to join the club the cool kids are all in, but haven't been able to get the broader populace to go along. This Award may be part of an effort to do so.

Comments

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge. We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave. First, Plato is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability. I only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere. At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak

Jamesian Philosophy Refreshed

Search This Blog