Noah Smith: "And now we come back to Steve Landsburg and Daniel Kuehn. The fact that Landsburg has come under assault for being flouting social norms causes Kuehn to give the man a free pass on the logic of his argument."
No, Noah. I have never given Landsburg a free pass. Other lines you can just admit you misinterpreted me (or not - I don't really care). This you need to retract.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
That NoahPinion is behaving just like an animal!
ReplyDeleteThe hermenuetics of economic discourse: Your original post may have attempted one thing: [love the method, not the message or mesanger]. But, it did come off as one confused attempt at justification. You seek redress for the wrong ofo being misinterpreted but maybe your exposition didnt live up to your intent.
ReplyDeleteI get this occasionally. I personally don't know what could be more clear than:
Delete"If he said that to one of those friends or relatives of mine and I was standing next to him, I'd hit him in the face. Rush too."
If you can think of something that makes it more clear that I do not agree with Landsburg and am in no way justifying him, you let me know and I'll post it.
Noah wanted to flex his righteous indignation and to do that he misrepresented a guy that was actually agreeing with him. In most circumstances, who really cares. In this circumstance, I'm going to be more sensitive about being accused of defending people that treat women like that. I wasn't exactly shy in suggesting that I was not defending Landsburg - Noah can perhaps justify getting some details wrong by pointing to my exposition, but he can't justify calling it a "free pass" by citing my exposition. That's on him.
Noah wanted to flex his righteous indignation and to do that he misrepresented a guy that was actually agreeing with him.
DeleteYou should hit him in the face, Daniel!