Time for an update! I'll try to keep it short, but don't hold your breath on that one. 
The weekend has come and gone - Friday was actually a really nice day. I got all my work taken care of early (I just took some notes on John Gaventa's Power and Powerlessness - a *great* book in the community power debate. bredoteau - this is the kind of American political study *you* could totally get behind. Gaventa argues that people do not challenge authority b/c they are shaped by power to not rebel. It's a fascinating study of Appalachia. Then I finished off some Plutarch. It was a good morning). Anyway, after the book I got a haircut and and wandered around the bookstore. That nite, my wife and I watched Legend. It's ..... interesting. I had fond memories, and the movie is visually resplendent. But, as an actual fantasy movie, it shoots a bit too hard for "archetype" and comes up short. My wife liked this guy - Gump - for all the wrong reasons (she cracked up at every goofy line and bizarre body contortion):
On Saturday - there was much joy over seeing The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy! It was truly excellent. There were dolphins, paranoid androids, and multiple headed aliens. What more could you want, really?
Tomorrow, I am a discussant at the political theory workshop. Then, that nite, I get to attend dinner with the speaker, Notre Dame's Gerry Mackie. I'm sort of excited. I've discussed before - at the comparative politics workshop, for one of my advisor's papers on obesity. So I don't really have nerves anymore. Just excited. The paper itself is a critique of Schumpeter's critiques of democracy. Schumpeter argues that democracy does not work, becaus people cannot identify the common good and the masses are too easily cowed by elites. Mackie blends political behavior literature with theory to argue that democracy is capable of getting to the common good, as voters and legislators have more sense than Schumpter assumes. It's a really interesting paper, and it's good to see theory blended with more empirical science (something that speaks to my heart).
The problem with the paper: Mackie relies a lot on institutions to argue that democracy can have good outcomes. So a key part of the normative good of democracy, in his eyes, relies on institutional systems. BUT, Mackie never really theorizes about how institutions should operate. This is a huge glaring problem - from studies that point out the inefficiences of Congress (like logrollling, pork barrel politics and putting party over general good) to urban politics literature that points out that local politics is controlled by agendas set by elites (mostly land developers and other powerful business interests) .... there is basically lots of evidence to point out the same institutions Mackie praises are highly problematic. Mackie introduces positivism, but backs off when it comes to institutions. This doesn't mean democracy is a bust - it just means that Mackie should have followed through and interrogated institutions more than he did. It's an earlly draft, and it should be really good when he's done.
Oh - in other news, the wife and I will be spending our anniversary this year at Lollapalooza. It was sort of expensive - but there are plenty of bands we want to see, and it seems like too much fun to pass by. As my dad put it: "This is why you LIVE in Chicago."
Anyway, that's enough for now I think. Later in the week, I'll toss up some other things I've been thinking about. (The preivews: one strand is about republican virtue, and the other centers around intelligent design.)
Hope everyone had a good weekend - and has a groovy week!
The weekend has come and gone - Friday was actually a really nice day. I got all my work taken care of early (I just took some notes on John Gaventa's Power and Powerlessness - a *great* book in the community power debate. bredoteau - this is the kind of American political study *you* could totally get behind. Gaventa argues that people do not challenge authority b/c they are shaped by power to not rebel. It's a fascinating study of Appalachia. Then I finished off some Plutarch. It was a good morning). Anyway, after the book I got a haircut and and wandered around the bookstore. That nite, my wife and I watched Legend. It's ..... interesting. I had fond memories, and the movie is visually resplendent. But, as an actual fantasy movie, it shoots a bit too hard for "archetype" and comes up short. My wife liked this guy - Gump - for all the wrong reasons
(she cracked up at every goofy line and bizarre body contortion):
On Saturday - there was much joy over seeing The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy! It was truly excellent. There were dolphins, paranoid androids, and multiple headed aliens. What more could you want, really?
Tomorrow, I am a discussant at the political theory workshop. Then, that nite, I get to attend dinner with the speaker, Notre Dame's Gerry Mackie. I'm sort of excited. I've discussed before - at the comparative politics workshop, for one of my advisor's papers on obesity. So I don't really have nerves anymore. Just excited. The paper itself is a critique of Schumpeter's critiques of democracy. Schumpeter argues that democracy does not work, becaus people cannot identify the common good and the masses are too easily cowed by elites. Mackie blends political behavior literature with theory to argue that democracy is capable of getting to the common good, as voters and legislators have more sense than Schumpter assumes. It's a really interesting paper, and it's good to see theory blended with more empirical science (something that speaks to my heart).
The problem with the paper: Mackie relies a lot on institutions to argue that democracy can have good outcomes. So a key part of the normative good of democracy, in his eyes, relies on institutional systems. BUT, Mackie never really theorizes about how institutions should operate. This is a huge glaring problem - from studies that point out the inefficiences of Congress (like logrollling, pork barrel politics and putting party over general good) to urban politics literature that points out that local politics is controlled by agendas set by elites (mostly land developers and other powerful business interests) .... there is basically lots of evidence to point out the same institutions Mackie praises are highly problematic. Mackie introduces positivism, but backs off when it comes to institutions. This doesn't mean democracy is a bust - it just means that Mackie should have followed through and interrogated institutions more than he did. It's an earlly draft, and it should be really good when he's done.
Oh - in other news, the wife and I will be spending our anniversary this year at Lollapalooza. It was sort of expensive - but there are plenty of bands we want to see, and it seems like too much fun to pass by. As my dad put it: "This is why you LIVE in Chicago."
Anyway, that's enough for now I think. Later in the week, I'll toss up some other things I've been thinking about. (The preivews: one strand is about republican virtue, and the other centers around intelligent design.)
Hope everyone had a good weekend - and has a groovy week!
VIEW 7 of 7 COMMENTS
Btw., my whole thing in my last post about the ancient and moderns is completely stolen from Heidegger! I confess! If you haven't, some day check out at least his first volume on Nietzsche. I think it should be required for intro to theory. Incredible!