I've been looking at Rawls a bit again. Sometimes I'm really amazed at the perversity of liberalism. A Theory of Justice is a perverse piece of work. That, and absurd.

A little more on this post on conscious rule following. Any tradesman, musician or athlete will tell you that the hand teaches the mind. That's the basis of the verb "to practice." For a writer the process of writing teaches the skill of writing, teaches the use of the imagination. Writing, for the sake of writing, is the mind working as a hand. Categories of experience are created by being 'discovered.' The naming, if it comes to that—there can be recognition without naming—comes after the action is complete.

Philosophical, as opposed to political, liberalism quite literally does not understand the arts because it can not allow that methodologies predicated on such ambiguity can have intellectual, and therefore moral, weight (sports in this context are rule following as mere entertainment).

Philosophical conservatism on the other hand is blatantly hypocritical, defending the pleasures of ambiguity as such only in secret and only as reserved for the elect. That's why there are so many priests in favor of homosexuality... for priests.

I've said this enough in the past: Alterman is a vulgarian and an ass, with a fan's contempt for both musicians and athletes.
---

I've got to write a letter. Go read Belle.