I paid US$0.99--so on the high side, but probably still low-balling its worth to me.

No, the final destination is to turn universities into real estate funds (in Europe--Stateside they can be turned into hedge funds).

Yes, it looks to me that according to Wollstonecraft ability to reason is a kind of -- perhaps unintended byproduct -- developmental achievement. Her reason is more akin to practical reason than theoretical reason (even though she engages in theoretical reason). There is a family resemblance to Adam Smith's position on reason as developed by Maria Carrasco in an important article.

Sandrine, thank you for your very quick, critical response. I think we disagree about some crucial interpretive issues and maybe even in our hermeneutics. 1. I read the "digression" as a self-standing, philosophical interlude. I do not think it superficial at all! 2. My point in the post is that in the digression she denies or departs from the (Deist) rationalism that you (rightly) associate with Price. (Moreover, throughout the Vindication she promotes the development of reason by way of the "grand passions" and life's experiences--she rejects the rationalism common among Deists.) 3. I do grant that Wollstonecraft thinks that (a suitably reformed) religion can play a positive role in one's life, but that's compatible with Spinozism (which did not encourage the elimination of religion). 4. On Stoicism. I would rather emphasize the Smithian (neo-Aristotelian) virtue ethic in the Vindication, but when it comes to marriage and love I see her primarily as a disciple of Rousseau without Rousseau's sexism.

Yes, it does. You should also look at Dennis' original post on the topic.

Thanks for reminding us Dennis!

Jarrod, I doubt Prof. Koppl was trying to provoke a vitriolic response.

There are a lot of classic Wimsatt papers, but that's not the one I was thinking about in this context.

In haste: 1. I think one way to approach dominance-free theorizing is to put the theorist in the model. Another is, of course, to ensure that really existing dominance relations can be captured by the model. 2. There is, indeed a voluntaristic streak in Khan (in the way that there is in Deleuze); I pointed this out at Hopkins. But Khan also has a Hegelian streak in which external practices/institutions and articulations help make us who we are. So, it is this combination that creates a fruitful tension in his work. 3. Yes, for Khan, education and curriculum are absolutely crucial to the vision of economic theory he proposes--this is a very prominent feature of his criticism of Larry Summers that I wrote about a few weeks ago: http://www.newappsblog.com/2013/03/before-larry-summers-became-synonymous-with-expert-for-hire-by-wall-street-he-was-the-harvard-president-who-suggested-while.html He has written more on this and I hope to return to Khan's vision for child development and education in the future.

David, First, apologies for the fact that your comment ended up in our spambox--this is a known problem, but we have not been able to fix it yet. This caused the delay of it appearing on the site. Second, yes, Singer has a tendency to adopt high profile proposals (that have received press attention) to his own ends. (The same is true of his prior enchantment with emissions trading. Third, nobody would deny that obesity is a public health problem that impacts (among other things) the health and life-style of obese individuals, the welfare state, and health insurance systems. (My wife is a retina surgeon and a large part of the growth in patients she is seeing is due to obesity related diabetes.) Just because I am critical of Singer's approach this does not make me a denier of the problem. Fourth, yet, this does not mean that some scientific studies are better than others. The Society of Actuaries was only focusing on cost to private health insurers. The study you focus on also does not look at the savings due to higher mortality. (Given that Canada has a public health system the costs it calculates are tax-payer costs; there are non-trivial moral differences between the different health care systems.) Finally, if one engages with these issues, perhaps, it would be morally wise to talk about the institutions and constraints that obese folk face (from potentially lousy genes, to poor access to quality foods, to bad school foods, sponsored to bad access to leisure opportunities, to government transportation and housing strategies that nudge people into unhealthy commutes, etc.).

Hopefully you are inspiring somebody, John!

Good point!

I might be even nicer if the fans of Singer (or Singer himself) could even begin to acknowledge the cultural and social biases implicit in his claims.

Thank you, Martin, for reminding us that Singer appeals to the essence of morality, "In addition to the well-known Jewish and Christian versions of the Golden Rule, we find similar ideas in the Confucian, Hindu, and Buddhist traditions." He somehow manages to omit Islam. Recall my references to Khan's criticism of Singer: http://www.newappsblog.com/2013/03/weekly-philo-of-economics-the-limitations-of-ones-model.html