|
@IllegibleLenny | |||||
|
The first time I encountered the reasonable/rational distinction was in an academic legal paper. You wrote an example of nebulous conceptual boundaries a while back that sounded a lot like a hypothetical from a law school exam.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
David Chapman
@Meaningness
|
1. velj |
|
🆕 Much of my explanation of how and why rationality works (the middle part of the book) is a simplified presentation of ethnomethodological concepts and findings in easier language.
It’s hip! You need to be able to say “ethnomethodology” confidently
meaningness.com/eggplant/ethno… pic.twitter.com/aGLORZV4zb
|
||
|
|
||
|
existentialpervert69
@IllegibleLenny
|
1. velj |
|
My point I guess is that there is a field of study that has to formalize messy, illegible human conflicts and do so in a way that we can mostly live with, and it sounds like it encapsulates a lot of the critiques of formal rationality ya got going on here.
|
||
|
|
||
|
David Chapman
@Meaningness
|
1. velj |
|
Yes… in practice, all technical fields have to do this, because nebulosity is unavoidable. It’s probably clearer in law than most others! Unfortunately one I know little about.
|
||
|
|
||