[Peace-discuss] the stinkin' lincoln legacy

Thu May 21 19:17:47 CDT 2009

> P.S. "Gedanken experiments"

My German was never very good; but now my bad German is more than a little rusty. J  I guess I should have stuck to calling them “thought experiments.”

>. But I believe in the present case that no compelling conclusions can be drawn

That may be true enough; but I think it may be unreasonable to expect a detailed and complete enough case to be made so as to provide compelling (as opposed to merely provocative) conclusions in an email or even a series of emails.  Poetry and poetic metaphors may shorten the amount of discourse and articulation needed to make a point; but then it takes people much more literate, intelligent, and wise than I to understand and appreciate the poetry – much less grasp what is being conveyed.

The best example of a “thought experiment” (although not technically involving counter factual statements as much as a counterfactual approach) in the social sciences was Max Weber’s comparative Sociology of Religion series in which he wrote  four books (one each on Ancient Judaism, Hinduism, Confucianism, and Protestantism) in order to demonstrate that a religion with the properties of Protestantism was sufficient if not necessary for the Rise of Capitalism and that the properties of other forms of religious belief were insufficient to support the rise of Capitalism but lead to alternative possibilities with respect to economic behavior.  But as I noted it took four relatively  large books to conduct this experiment and present a compelling case for his conclusions and not a single email or series of emails.

The benefit of these presentation on this list are that they are provocative and might cause people to bracket their commonly accepted notions of Lincoln and call them into question so as to treat his statements and positions as problematic realities whose meanings require analyses of the contexts in which they took place and serve as indexical expressions of his intentions, purposes, and understandings as well as  a glossary visible and noticeable indicators as to what practical purposes at hand he was trying to accomplish at the moment that he expressed the articulations or took the actions.  However, I still think that for a July 4 float they are much to provocative in nature with little readily understood substance to those who do not already accept their premises so as to cause many of those who might read them in total or in parsed and edited form to take a defensive stand rather than be open to wanting to examine their validity and implications.  Moreover, I doubt if they can really be edited into an effective slogan edition even with pictures so as to work for a parade float that passes by in a few moments.

From: Morton K. Brussel [mailto:brussel at illinois.edu] 
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 4:37 PM
To: LAURIE SOLOMON
Cc: 'C.G.Estabrook'; 'Peace-discuss'
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] the stinkin' lincoln legacy

On May 21, 2009, at 4:06 PM, LAURIE SOLOMON wrote:

Ah Mort,  counterfactual gedanke experiments are well within the scientific method and experience.  While they cannot change the past or the future - for that matter - they can help us understand missed possible alternative realities and reveal potential assumptions and/or presumptive conditions that were presumed to exist so as be sufficient if not necessary in order to enable one to ground the decisions that were made and actions that were taken.  Like all experiments, the evidence is probabilistic and not deterministic; and the conclusions are proofs the sense that they can be proven empirically.  They are only open to disproof logically and empirically. Some would say counterfactual gedanke experiments are merely heuristic; but even so, heuristic exercises can be instructive and profitable. 

Laurie, they may be. But I believe in the present case that no compelling conclusions can be drawn. Given strong enough arguments, I guess I could be wrong. I haven't seen such compelling arguments here. On the other hand, it could be interesting to consider in depth other (long range) scenarios and speculations on what might have been. Here's an opportunity for for historical fiction novelists. 

P.S. "Gedanken experiments"

-----Original Message-----
From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Morton K. Brussel
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 3:28 PM
To: C.G.Estabrook
Cc: Peace-discuss
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] the stinkin' lincoln legacy

I find all this discussion about what might have been rather silly. No  
one knows what the future might have been, in the short or thelong  
run,  if other actions/policies had been taken before or after Fort  
Sumter. It's what's called idle speculation, that leads to nowhere.    
--mkb

On May 21, 2009, at 3:07 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:

Options other than war were available to Lincoln, and he was aware  

of them.

Advice came from the most distinguished American military figure of  

the day,

Gen. Winfield Scott (1786-1866). He served on active duty as a  

general longer

than any other man in American history and may have been the ablest  

American

commander of his time; he devised the Anaconda Plan that would be  

used to defeat

the Confederacy.

In a letter addressed to  Governor Seward (leading Republican and  

Lincoln's Secretary of State) -- and obviously meant for Lincoln's  

eyes -- on the day preceding Lincoln's inauguration (March 3, 1861),  

Scott suggested that the president had four possible courses of  

action:

[1] adopt the Crittenden Compromise (which restored the Missouri  

Compromise

line: slavery would be prohibited north of the 36° 30′ parallel  

and guaranteed

south of it);

[2] collect duties outside the ports of seceding States or blockade  

them;

[3] conquer those States at the end of a long, expensive, and  

desolating war,

and to no good purpose; or,

[4] say to the seceded States, "Wayward sisters, depart in peace!"

Scott clearly preferred the forth.  In retrospect, it probably would  

have been best.

(For more on why that would have been the case, see the recent book  

by William Marvel I mentioned the other day.)  --CGE

John W. wrote:

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 10:37 AM, E. Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag <mailto:ewj at pigs.ag 

wrote:

Death toll from "Lincoln's War"

"The number that is most often quoted is 620,000. At any rate, these

casualties exceed the nation's loss in all its other wars, from the

Revolution through Vietnam."

Adjusted for today's US population, the number would be over 6  

million.

I'm curious what you would have done as President in 1861, Wayne.  

Simply let

the South secede?

------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________

Peace-discuss mailing list

Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net

http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20090521/14df3e27/attachment.htm