Bulverism was a very good essay that called on the existence of thoughts and arguments. It discussed Marxism and Freudianism as types of existence. Freudians state that we exist as bundles of complexes whereas Marxians say that we exist as members of an economic class. Both of these thoughts are tainted at the source.
Bulverism is basically proving your opponent to be wrong. This is partly how the judicial system works, one side tries to prove that the other side is wrong about their argument. The piece brings up how Bulverism is used in politics and I thought this was a great point. It states that capitalists must be bad economists because they want capitalism and likewise Communists must also be bad economists because they want Communism. Of course the rights and wrongs can only be found by reasoning.
I really liked the quote about proving all proofs to be invalid. I thought that this part was very deep and, although it seemed to contrdict itself, very true. Even if you succeed or fail to prove they are invalid, your argument is still wrong because the proof the all proofs are invalid is also invalid itself. I think Bulverism is a very cool and interesting topic that I would really like to study further. It had depth and can start a pretty good argument if kept within just Bulverism. Of course, even if I prove that Bulverism exists, I am still wrong.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I really like the quote about proving all proofs to be invalid as well. It is an interesting and humbling concept. However, I am not sure I agree with your definition of Bulverism. I don't think that it is merely proving your opponent wrong, I think Lewis meant Bulverism to be attacking your opponent him or herself instead of proving their point wrong. This is why Bulverism is such an interesting and convicting concept.
ReplyDelete