« The book is out | Main | Young Galaxy: Fall For You »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

"I lost my temper with a Thomistically-inclined fellow once when he insisted that because the word "conservative" can't be defined rigorously it must have no meaning at all."

This struck me as pretty funny. Also, is it really not possible to define "conservative" rigorously? Surely a Thomist could!

From the article: "you know, one of those manualist neo-paleo-neo-Thomists of the baroque persuasion..."

My brain is hurting. But I did LOL.

"Of course. Foolish of me. Leave it to a two-tier Thomist to devise a definition of love that does not actually involve love.'

This is hilarious!

Yes, that one made me laugh, too.

I think you can define "conservative" reasonably well in a general way in terms of temperament. But it gets slippery as a label for specific political views. I've really forgotten the conversation now but I think maybe the other guy wanted something pretty specific and fixed, so that it would imply exactly the same views in any context. Anyway, it was annoying...

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)