Brexit, Coronavirus, and a Teleprompter II

As I was saying ... the silliness of the Oval Office speech became obvious in stages. He didn't mean "cargo." He didn't mean to suggest that Americans abroad wouldn't be able to fly home. He didn't even mean to exclude the United Kingdom. The UK and the Republic of Ireland were both explicitly included within a couple of days.

So supporting Brexit had never had anything to do with it. Or not much.

It was a disaster of a speech, reminding me of an old comedy bit about a cheese shop.

"Not much of a cheese shop, is it?"

"It's the finest in the district, sir."

"Explain the logic behind that conclusion."

"It's so clean."

"It's certainly uncontaminated by cheese."

Anyway: through much of the speech Trump appeared to be having trouble reading the words on the teleprompter. Yet he persisted, which resulted in some odd inflections.

My guess is that some of the simple looniness of the speech came at patches where Trump could not help but riff. He was almost certainly riffing, going off text, when he said, "Anything coming from Europe to the United States is what we are discussing."

That is not a line a professional "ghost" would have written even if it were actually the policy the POTUS was trying to announce.

Ah, for the professional speechwriters. Among all the sorts of expertise to which our leaders used to attend, all now discarded ... I miss that one the most.

Peace out.

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