Twitter | Pretraživanje | |
David Chapman 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
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
existentialpervert69
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.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se" More
existentialpervert69 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @Meaningness
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.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"
David Chapman 1. velj
Odgovor korisniku/ci @IllegibleLenny
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.
Reply Retweet Označi sa "sviđa mi se"