More note taking from Colin McGinn's blog.

I've argued for years that the politics of academic rationalism is implicitly reactionary, but I'm still surprised how far this has come. I'm a bit shocked that the sort of discussion above is left without comment [other than by a semi-retired carpenter] and that those arguing for an intellectual authoritarianism are so unaware of the history of such ideas, and of their history of failure.
If all the issues left are "technical" then of course the technicians should rule, but the important issues in society are never technical.

"As has already been said, politicians need to actually listen to experts."
They did. But they listened to rationalists. Read Rumsfeld's CV.

Who represents modernity in Turkey at the moment, the secularist military or the Islamists?
It's an easy question to answer if you're willing to go where the data takes you. But data has a tendency to undermine formal rigor and in philosophy, and economics, and these days even in war, formal rigor takes precedence. I guess it's just a matter of esthetics.

The level of thought on that site is just embarrassing. I'm repeating myself, but why not? Idiots.
---
A rotating electric fan is the objective correlative of precisely what!?